Jayanta's Blog

We must start planning to reduce global population in a more systematic manner if we are serious to address some of the greatest threats of our time including climate change, wealth and income inequality, and immigration

2020-01-23T12:17:00.003-05:00

Source: Scientific American, Dec. 1, 2014.

Yes, it’s high time to start planning to shrink human footprint in the world by reducing global population. It's not just bringing the population growth rate down but total population in a more systematic manner, ideally with least possible disruption in our societies and in the Government. The issue is critically important to address many other issues including man-made climate change, wealth and income inequality, human migration and refugee crisis. These issues themselves are inter-connected.

Humans first reached the 1 billion mark around 1800, a doubling time of about 300 years; 2 billion in 1927, a doubling time of 127 years; and 4 billion in 1974, a doubling time of 47 years. We can clearly understand that doubling time is increasingly getting shorter. World population crossed the 7 billion mark around October 31, 2011. Current World population is around 8 billion. 1 in 8 people in the world today don’t have enough to eat. World population is expected to reach around 9.7 billion by 2050 and then peak around 11 billion by 2100. It’s always a challenge for planners to satisfy the basic needs for food, shelter, clothes, energy, and other items for ever increasing number of people.

Many times various lobby groups, which include Non-Profit or Non-Governmental organizations refuse to accept ecological limitations of our planet. Religion does play its role here by promoting the idea that mere mortal humans are too insignificant to damage Mother Nature and God’s creation. We also know that aspiration of growing number of people to have a western life style is putting more pressure on the planet in almost every front, starting from more meat and dairy based diet, which need more land, water and other resources, to growing energy consumption, which is mostly met by fossil fuel.

World Watch Institute estimated that our planet has just 1.9 hectares of land per person for satisfying almost all its basic needs and also take care of the waste it generates. That means growing food and clothes, supplying energy, and absorbing the waste we generate from that size of land. An average American uses about 9.7 hectares. This indicates that our planet can support only about 1.5 billion people with a lifestyle of an average American.

The situation becomes little more complicated if we start calculating various basic needs that a person requires. One good example would be water. Biologically a person needs about 1 gallon (about 3.8 Lt) of water per day. In 2010, USA used 355 billion gallons of freshwater, i.e. over 1,000 gallons (4,000 liters) per person per day. Half was used to generate electricity, one-third for irrigation, and roughly one-tenth for household use: flushing toilets, taking bath, washing clothes and dishes, and watering lawns. If 7.5 billion people consumed water at that American level, world usage would top 10,000 cubic kilometers per year. Total world supply – freshwater lakes and rivers – is about 91,000 cubic kilometers. Here keep in mind that about 2.1 billion people in the world don’t have enough water to drink and more than twice as many lack safe sanitation, as per World Health Organization.

By now we, or at many concerned scientists and other policy experts, became aware of growing crisis of man-made climate change; growing danger to humanity due to mass extinction of various living organisms from plants to insects, birds, and other animals; increasingly acidic and polluted oceans and seas. This is not of mere academic interest but has very close relation to our food supply and farming crisis as rapidly declining bee population indicates. Whatever we may do or plan to do, we simply cannot supply enough food, water, energy, and other basic necessities for ever growing number of people. Few probable solutions to feed more than 8 billion people demands some drastic changes in our life style and food habit might not be so acceptable for many people, mainly the affluent ones in developed countries like the U.S. One such prescription to feed growing number of people is based on relying more on plant based diet and less on meat and dairy. An average American eats about 638 percent more red meat, 145 percent more dairy, 234 percent more poultry, 268 percent more eggs, while consuming substantially less whole grain, legumes, fruits and vegetables to maintain a nutritionally sound and sustainably produced planet-wide diet.

Currently we treat farm land and other natural resources like forest and marsh land, lakes etc. as land banks for future expansion of real estate and industrial growth. Many of us either don’t know or conveniently forget that only about nine countries in this whole world are actually self-sufficient in food. Despite of economic prosperity and technological advancement the only European country that is self-sufficient in food is France. Those nice looking cows in lush green meadows in Switzerland mostly rely on imported grains and fodder.

Many policy makers in our local communities, or the state, or even the country can think that they can outsource, arguably, the most labour intensive and at the same time least remunerative occupation of farming to some poorer countries and then buy food if they have money. They forget that the buck must stop somewhere and it’s not always the poorer countries in the developing world. Closing local family owned farms, significantly high suicide rate of farmers, mainly in countries that actually grow its own food, is a well-documented phenomenon. It’s present in rich developed countries like the U.S., which has higher rate of farmers suicide than war veterans, and France. A developing country like India, which still has more than half of its population depend on agriculture, is fast earning the dubious title of “farmer suicide capital of the world”.

This situation is not much sustainable, particularly with growing number of people to feed. It’s also shown that rising food price is one of the major reasons for socio-political instability and a major reason for Arab spring. That’s a rather constant theme in human history for social unrest.

The problem becomes more intense as income inequality (as captured by the Absolute Gini) is fast growing in almost every country since mid-1970s. It roughly correlates with globalization along with our shrinking non-renewable resources for future generations to grow or even to sustain itself. Pre-globalization income inequality between developed and developing countries is declining though. It indicates few other facts like export of poverty from part of those developing nations to a large section of developed world. Now, an American or a British poor resembles more like their colleagues in India and China while the rich people in these countries are also becoming more similar at a time when income gap between a rich and a poor person within almost every country including in the U.S. is growing.

That growing income and wealth inequality is again affecting the way our political system and big corporations work. Despite of fully knowing the facts about man-made climate change, major players in fossil fuel industries like Royal Dutch Shell and Exxon Mobil got away after misleading general public, national Governments, and many of its own shareholders. Proposed energy policies show demand rising for natural gas but slowing for oil and coal.

Source: TIME, Jan. 27, 2020.

We need to remember that natural gas is also emits greenhouse gases when burned. Only the extent is less that oil and coal but significantly higher than renewable energy sources like solar and wind power. If countries meet the Paris climate agreement's reasonably bold targets, demand for all fossil fuels would decline and all the remaining fossil fuel sources must remain below ground.

Despite of its huge influence, many of the fossil fuel companies are now facing a grim reality due to dwindling long term supply of its main revenue sources (i.e. fossil fuel itself); and duet to public awareness and resulting frustration, anger, and political backlash in many countries due to worsening climate crisis that even concerned scientists and most aggressive model of climate change failed to perceive. That frustration is more in western democracies that still have productive media, freedom of speech, and where people used to enjoy relatively less polluted lives with relatively less natural calamities. Many Western democracies, certainly the U.S. are increasingly facing many climate change induced natural calamities. Coastal flooding becoming more common and people from those areas are expected to flock to certain areas and cities. Population pressure in those cities would grow as rural communities are increasingly less viable for many other reasons, mainly related to rural economy. Many coastal areas in our country and many others parts of the World would be lost forever and beyond reconstruction due to rising sea level and other threats arising due to man-made climate change.

In many other not-so-democratic countries such public frustration and anger are being suppressed but sometimes expressed in form of civil unrest and distrust on its government and political system. Many big corporations are now forced to acknowledge not only ecological and but also political limitations of its core corporate mantra of profit maximization for its shareholders.

Latest data available (2017) suggest that an average Total Fertility Rate (TFR) in the world is 2.432. Even though TFR has continued to fall since 1970s, the doubling time for total human population in the world grew increasingly shorter as mentioned earlier. Traditionally the debate of over population was limited among few developing countries with very high population like China and India. Later many other countries with “unacceptably” high population growth like Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Indonesia etc. came into focus. Many Americans routinely complain about over population, mainly in bigger cities, even though American population growth rate declined for last 80 years.

We all probably know about the famous one child policy in China. It was introduced in 1979 and continues as late as October 2015. Now we are becoming increasingly aware about the atrocities and issues associated with that policy from various western news channels as China is gaining more global attention. Many foreign nationals, including Americans, adopted Chinese children. They grew up abroad mostly in western democracies. These Chinese born adults now started asking inconvenient questions and also searching for answers as shown in the documentary, One Child Nation. Now China has the worst by birth sex ratio in the world with 115 boys born for each 100 girls, comfortably beating India, which got global attention for girl child killing and selective abortion.

Few other countries like India also tried various autocratic means including forced sterilization to slow down population growth rate. Sometimes it's targeted against specific race or religion. Female infanticide or selective girl child killing is also being used in countries like India, but not as a government policy.

Lack of understanding and/or willingness to introduce sex education among teens, availability and affordability to get safe abortion and other family planning methods are also influenced by growing religious fundamentalism and political exploitation of religion by a section of policy makers in many countries. Just by allowing women to get education; delaying marriages; allowing women to have a say in the decision of marriage, family planning, and pregnancy would alleviate poverty and control population growth not just for that particular family but eventually for the country. Melinda Gates of Gates Foundation recently quoted as saying, “family planning is crucial anywhere, in any community around the world, because if a woman can decide if and when to have a child, she’s going to be healthier and her child is going to be healthier.” That issue is also very closely related to poverty and social mobility for the members of the family.

There seems to be a fierce resistance among so many leaders in various countries, who are overwhelmingly men and often don’t want to give up control of a woman’s fertility and of their own wives’ fertility, besides denying girls the right to get education, mainly sex education, which is still a taboo in many societies around the world. Oddly enough, USA is not that unfamiliar with such resistance either.

Growing influence of religion in both public education and in public policy seem to influence, if not create, many such issues that polarize people in many countries around the world. Even in the U.S., which spends the most in education and research, the gap between what scientists/experts believe vs what general public believe is growing. About 59 percent of general American public view “growing world population will be a major problem” while 86 percent of American scientists the same way. The gap is wider in issues like evolution, abortion, and even GMO. Political polarization among the two main political parties in the U.S. on that single issue of abortion is also growing.

There was a famous court battle, known as Scopes Trial, around 1925. It was about teaching evolution as opposed to religious dogma of "intelligent design" or creationism in schools. That incident shook the country. As a result, the influence of religion in American education system and politics started a steady decline. Since that time American society and politics started becoming more fact and science minded. USA became political, military, and economic superpower. Then it changed again. It all seems to have started around 1976 with deeply religious Ronald Reagan. Both the parties, including progressive Democrat Jimmy Carter, started embracing Christian fundamentalism, albeit much less than their Republican colleagues like Reagan. That change also correlates with worsening sociopolitical polarization, growing income and wealth inequality, growing public frustration on increasingly dysfunctional American political system and capitalism.

In the meantime, growing population of older people initially in more developed countries and then in other less affluent developing countries became a more serious issue as medical science keep on improving prolonging our lives. The rate far outpaced our ability and/or desire to restrict our family size and adopt family planning measures. That’s particularly crucial among poorer and less educated population in almost every country, including the U.S.

About 11 percent of people in the World are aged 65 and over, as of 2019. This percentage is expected to jump to nearly 17 percent by 2050. By 2050, one in four persons, i.e. 25 percent, living in Europe and Northern America could be aged 65 or over. In 2018, for the first time in history, persons aged 65 or above outnumbered children under five years of age globally. The number of persons aged 80 years or over is projected to triple, from 143 million in 2019 to 426 million in 2050.

Challenges arising due to this growing number of older people- taking care of them, providing them health care, ensuring financial stability for increasingly longer period of time after retirement that too with decreasing number of working age population, and other such issues- are posing enormous policy challenge for every Government in the world

Less developed countries are trying to absolve its duties, many people say, as they tend to force adult children to take care of their old parents and grandparents. Younger generation needs to accomplish the hard emotional and financial duties with declining income (as compared to their parents) and diminishing resources like (family) property and savings. India passed The Maintenance And Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act in 2007. The act legally requires children and grandchildren (but not minors) to maintain the health and wellness of an aging family member, where “maintenance” is defined as the provision for food, residence and medical attendance and treatment; and “senior citizen” as any person age sixty or older.

This message of controlling population is almost unheard of in most of developed countries in the western world. It was not much of a reality just few years ago that an American presidential hopeful would talk about population control in an open forum. This year we heard that too although that progressive and liberal politician been criticized to suggest population control as part of tackling climate change.

Temperate western countries, mainly in Europe, traditionally had less people for various reasons including limitation of natural resources, lack of biodiversity, lower fertility of land etc. As colonization spread across Europe, they got habituated to slave labor and almost free natural resources at the cost of other people from around the world. European colonization also affected natural or organic socio-political evolution in those colonies, many of which were having highly developed civilizations and prosperous economies with long distance sea trading culture without having any desire or need to establish colonies. That time we also did not have the knowledge that we have now. We did not know what burning fossil fuel would lead to, what type of pressure the planet faces for our growing addiction to more energy dependent affluent “western” lifestyle. Ecological limit of the planet was not known.

The core issue in most of the cases is our blind faith in “growth”- any kind of growth- be it growing household income; company profit; national GDP; number of members of an organization, religious, or political, or otherwise. It has become an addiction to growth based perception of development. Growth became the core mantra for corporations and governments alike. It tend to ignore the ecological limitations of “growth” and coerce us to think that shifting or outsourcing the consequences to distant nations and on people whom we don’t know or live with, would not affect us, as a society and as an individual. How wrong we are!

It’s high time to start asking serious questions about what type of model of development we should have, to sustain this world and our quality of life. It becomes more important for developing countries like China, India, Brazil and so many more, where we almost constantly hear about "development" and conflicts arising from it. We hear the conservationists and global warming experts who tell us to consume less, create less carbon footprints. On the other hand, we are constantly hearing many economists and policy makers that we need “growth”, we need to spend more, and consume more. From our childhood we had an impression that low or zero “growth” is very bad.

There are few emerging alternative economic models that recognize ecological limits of human development and emphasize socioeconomic equality. Two alternative economic models pop up. The first one proposes a steady-state economy: one that has stopped growing in terms of GDP, but continues to improve quality of life. It’s maintained by an ecologically sustainable rate of resource throughput and a steady state of human population.

The second one is a sustainable de-growth model that had been defined as “an equitable down-scaling of production and consumption that increases human well-being and enhances ecological conditions at the local and global level, in the short and long term”. The paradigm is that human progress without economic growth is possible. It has been shown repeatedly that GDP per capita does not correlate with overall happiness above a certain level of satisfying people’s basic needs. According to a recent research, earning more than a threshold level does not translate into increasing overall happiness and satisfaction of life, while may have negative impact on quality of life.

It would be naive to think that developed countries around the world are or will remain immune to the consequences for climate change, high corruption, poor governance and failure of democracy in many, if not most, countries around the world. Desperation to leave poorer countries can never be addressed by building increasingly higher walls or tightening immigration laws or isolationist policies.

We surely can debate and reform our immigration policy but there can't be any confusion that it would be much better and sustainable for reasonably prosperous developed countries including the U.S. to enable those unfortunate people to stay in their own native countries by addressing the issues for which most of them are forced to leave or seek a better life aligned to their views, ambition, and ability or talent. It’s equally true for many people in the U.S. and other developed countries, who prefer to live in those tropical countries in the developing world. Ideally, we should have a border–less world and visa-less international travel. But to achieve that reality we, at least majority of us and our Governments, first need to believe and then establish a similar, if not the same, definition of truth and justice. That must not be based on some religious or political ideology but on science, fact, and logic.

By now we should get the clear message that we have to restrict first and then shrink human footprint if we, as a human race, like to continue human civilization in its present form in this planet for centuries to come. Sooner we understand and act the better.

Short URL- https://bit.ly/2un6XEd

গরুময় ভারতে গোবরের গন্ধ ভাল লাগাতে শিখতে হবে

2019-09-06T11:30:00.001-04:00

প্রথমে মনে হয়েছিল এসব ঐ মাড়োয়ারি সেবা সমিতির কাজ। খোঁজ নিয়ে জানলাম ওটা পশ্চিমবঙ্গের একটা মফস্বল শহরে একটা স্থানীয় বাঙ্গালী ক্লাবের কাজ। গণেশ চতুর্থী পালন। বেশ একটা বাড়তি চাঁদা তোলা আর র্ফুতি করার অজুহাত তো পাওয়া গেল। যে যার মত অজুহাত খুঁজে নিচ্ছে। কারুর দুগ্গা থেকে শুরু করে গণেশ, মা মনষা, মাই শনিও। আবার অন্য় কারুর ইদ্, সবেবরাৎ, মহরম থেকে শুরু করে কৃষ্ মাস আর গুড ফ্রাইডে তক্।

আগে বাঙ্গালীদের "ভারতীয় হওয়াটা" ঐ দেওয়ালিতে কিছু পটকা ফাটানার মধ্য়েই সীমাবদ্ধ ছিল। বাড়ীতে মা দিদিরা প্রদীপ জ্বালাত। সেসব অবশ্য় কালীপূজো উপলক্ষ্য় করেই হতো। কেউ কেউ তা টেনে টুনে দেওয়ালি পর্য্য়ন্ত নিয়ে যেত। তা বাঙ্গালির ভয়ঙ্কর সেই নরমুন্ডমালিনী, অর্দ্ধনগ্ন, সবকিছু তুচ্ছ করা মা কালী ভারতের গোবলয় আর দক্ষিনে ঠিক পাত্তা পেল না। ভারতের দক্ষিনে আর গোবলয়ে সব মেয়ে ভগবানকেই বেশ এরটা শান্ত, মমতাময় করে, অর্থাৎ বেশ গৃহপালিত করে তৈরী করা হলো। অনেক বেশি সামন্ততান্ত্রীক গোবলয়ে সাহস, শৌর্য, বীর্যের প্রতীক হয়ে উঠল বজরঙ্গবলী, অর্থাৎ লর্ড হানুমান। তাতে ওকানকার পুরুষকুলের সম্মান আর দাসত্বের মহত্ব দুটোকেই আরও মহিমান্বিত করা গেল। মা কালী প্রাধানত বাংলাতেই Lথাকল। সেটাও কিছু গরীব গূর্ব, চোর-ডাকাত, পুলিশ, আর কিছু দাপুটে বড়লোকের বাড়ীতেই থেকে গেল। ভারতে পুলিশের সঙ্গে ডাকাতের খুব একতা তফাৎ নাকি নেই। আর ঐ বড়লোকে, জোতদার, জমিদার গুলো আগে প্রধানত ডাকাতই ছিল

ছোটতে যখন ওখানে বড় হয়েছিলাম তখন, আর তার পরেও এসব পশ্চিমবঙ্গের কোন মফস্বল শহরে তো নয়ই, বড় শহরেও মনে হয় খুব একটা গণেশ পুজো, ধনতেরাশ, ছট্ পরব্, কড়োয়াচোত, পোঙ্গল, লাহোড়ি পালন হত না। এখন নাকি ওসব ঘটা করে পালন খুবই সাধারন ব্যাপার। কালোধনের (Black money) সঙ্গে পাল্লা দিয়ে পটকার দাপটও বাড়ল। বাঙ্গালীরা নাকি ভারতীয় হতে লাগল।

পুরুতরাজ, জমিদারি, সতীদাহ সবই আস্তে আস্তে শুরু হবে মনে হচ্ছে। সঙ্গে রবি ঠাকুর, রামমোহন, বিদ্য়াসাগর, নেতাজি পুজোও। জাতপাত, শনি, মা মনসা, ধনতেরাশ, কড়োয়া চোত, ছট্ পরব্, Lord গ্যানেশ (আমাদের সময় উনি গণেশই ছিলেন), হাঁচি, টিকটিকি, astrology সবই তো রমরম করে চলছে মমতাময় বঙ্গে। আর তারথেকেও অনেক বেশি ঢাকঢোল পিটিয়ে গরুময় ভারতে। সঙ্গে কাঠ ছুঁয়ে "touch wood" (আর অন্য় পশ্চিমি কুসংষ্কার), LOL, OMG, Swiss tour সবই একসঙ্গে দিব্য়ি চলছে।

ডান্ডিয়াটা গুজরাটেই চলে বেশি। মহারাষ্ট্রেও দাপট যথেষ্ট কারন ওখানের বড়লোক বা বাবু সম্প্রদায় অনেক বছর থেকেই গুজরাটি । দিল্লির মসনদেও দাপট বেড়েছে। তা, চেহারার ধরন আর টাকার ওপর আফুরন্ত অকর্ষণ অনেকটা এক হলেও, লর্ড গ্যানেশ গুজরাটি কিনা, বা তার গুজ্জু জিন আছে কিনা, আর থাকলে সেটা এল কোথা থেকে- এগুলো ঠিক জানা যাচ্ছে না। গুজরাটে অবশ্য় ঐ জিন নিয়ে অনেকই সমস্য়া । আর তার পেছনে নাকি ডান্ডিয়া আর নবরাত্রির বেশ কিছু অবদানও আছে। তা ঐ প্রশ্নগুলো নাকি politically correct নয়। Racism এর charge ও লাগিয়ে দেওয়া যেতে পারে। তার ওপর সামনে বিধানসভার ভোট আসছে মোল্লাময় বঙ্গে।

ঘরের কাছে সুন্দরবন বলে কিনা তা জানি না, তবে আগে "বাঘের বাচ্চা " বলতে বঙ্গ-সন্তান গর্ব বোধ করত। বাঘ ভারতের অন্য় জায়গাতেও পাওয়া যায় আর "বাঘের বাচ্চা " বলতে গর্ব বোধ ওরাও করত। এখনও পর্যন্ত বাঙ্গালী থাকা ঐ নরেন্দ্র নাথ দত্ত, ওরফে "ভিভেকানন্দ", গো মাংস খাওয়া সমর্থনই করেছিলেন। তা, গুজরাটী নরেন্দ্রনাথ এখন সবাইকে নিরামিশাষী করতে ব্যস্ত। বেশ কিছু বছর হলো বাঘ যে কখন গরু হল আর পশ্চিমবঙ্গে কখন গো-বলয়ের অংশ হতে লাগল তা ঠিক বোঝা গেল না। এখন ওনার, অর্থাৎ লর্ড গ্যানেশের অনারে ঐ ডান্ডিয়া করতে হচ্ছে পশ্চিমবঙ্গেও! সাঁওতালি তো ছেড়ে দিলাম (উপজাতি, মানে বাংলায় বললে tribal তো- ঠিক সভ্য নয় কিনা), ঐ সর্বঘটে কাঁঠালিকলা ন্য়াকা ন্য়াকা, ধরা-ছাড়া রবীন্দ্র নেত্ত, বা ঐ কলকাতার ইস্পেশাল ধুনুচি নেত্ত মার্কা, বাঙ্গালী কিছু পছন্দ নয় নাকি তেনার? হিন্দি সিনেমায় তো বাপু তাইই করে- বাঙ্গালী বোঝাতে, সঙ্গে একটা "এ্যকলা চ্য়ালো ড়ে" গান, আর কিছু বেখাপ্পা অপ্রাসঙ্গিক শব্দ- "রোশোগোল্লা", "বাবুমোশাই", "আমি তোমাকে ভালোবাশি" মার্কা।

মা দুগ্গার আর তার সব ছেলেপুলের ই একটা হিল্লে হল হল মনে হচ্ছে এই বাঁদররাজের উথ্থানে। মধ্যেখান থেকে লর্ড ক্যারটিক এর কপাল আর ভোগ দুইই মারা গেল। একটা খারাপ কথা বেড়িয়ে যাচ্ছিল একটু হলে (কোন রকমে সামলে নিলাম)! বেচারার ভাগ্য চিরকালই খারাপ। তা এই পদ্ম ফোটা ভারতেও ওর ভাগ্য ঠিক ফুটল না- অতভাল চেহারা, গায়কি, নৃত্য়, আর যুদ্ধ বিদ্য়ায়, মানে নাচে-গানে-ফাইটিং এ ভরপুর পারদর্শিতা সত্বেও!

ঐ একেবারে অপদার্থ লিপিস্টিক মাখা; জিন্স, sports-shoe পছন্দ করা; feminism, বাংরেজির (বাংলা যত কমবে তত নাকি ভালো), আর কলির জ্য়ান্ত কাত্তিক হার্তিক রোশনের ভক্ত ঐ মেয়েগুলোর লর্ড ক্যারটিকের ভক্ত হওয়ার কথা ছিল! ওগুলোর সবথেকে বেশি ওয়াট্ লাগছে, মানে দুর্গতি হচ্ছে। আরও অনেক বেশী হবে এই বাঁদর-রাজ বাড়তে থাকলে! ছেলেগুলো নাচাচ্ছে আর ওরাও দ্বিগুণ উৎসাহে আর শ’গুণ নির্বুদ্ধিতায় নেচে চলছে। ছেলে আর ঐ কপালে তিলক কাটা ভুরিমোটা লোকগুলোক সব মালপোয়া খেয়ে যাবে। ঐ লোকগুলো যেমন নাচাবে তেমন নাচবে। ঘরে, মন্দিরে, রাস্তা ঘাটে- সব জায়গায়। কিনা, ভগবান তুষ্ট হবে আর আর্যাবর্ত্য মহান দেশ হবে। বাঁদর, রাক্ষস, আর মেয়েগুলো ঐ আর্য প্রভুদের সেবায় প্রাণ ঢেলে দেবে। ঐ চন্ডালিকার "সীতে" (ফিনফিনে একটা কমলা রং এর শাড়ী পরে, রামের পেছনে আর ভাই লক্ষণের সামনে দুঃখী দুঃখী মুখে typical slow motion এ হাঁটা), রাম ভক্ত হনুমান, আর বিভীষণ মার্কা কিছু রাক্ষস যেমন মহান হয়েছিল আর কি! অতীত আর আগুনে-চলা সীতার জামানার ঐ রাম রাজত্ব নাকি ফিরে আসবে। আহা, মামার বাড়ী আর কি!

এসব কিন্তু মাত্র গত পাঁচ বা ছয় বছরে হয় নি। ভারত স্বাধীন হবার পর থেকেই প্রায় শুরু হয়েছিল রোগটা- "সেকুলারিসম" এর আড়ালে। ডিসেম্বর ১৯৯২ তে প্রথম ডাক্তারের কাছে যাবার পরামর্শ আসে। এখন, গত কয়েক বছর হল গুটি বসন্তের দাগগুলো বেড়োতে শুরু করেছে। তাতেও অবশ্য় অধিকাংশ "হিন্দুর" আহ্লাদ আর দিবাস্বপ্ন কমার বদলে তা বেড়েই চলেছে। দেশে থাকাগুলোর তো বটেই, বিদেশে থাকা গুলোও খুব একটা পিছিয়ে নেই।

নাচ শেষ হলে আশাকরি সবাই বুঝতে পারবে ঐ মেয়েগুলোর হাতে রঙ্গীন কাগজ চেটান দুটো শুকনো লাঠিই থাকল। হাতে শুকনো বোঁদের একটা লাড্ডু, রোশোগোল্লা নয়, থাকলেও থাকতে পারে। উপরে তাকালে দেখতে পাবে ঐ লেজকাটা বাঁদরগুলো গাছের ডালে বসে কেমল মজা দেখল। বেশ কেমন রসিয়ে রসিয়ে খ্য়া খ্যা করে হাসছে। যাক্, নাচা তবে সার্থক!

এত দুর লিখে ছিলাম। ভাবছিলাম এবার শেষ করব। তা পাশ থেকে একজন বলে উঠল- "কি করবি? কে আঁটকাতে পারবে।"

ওরাই, ঐ মেয়েগুলোই পারবে। ওদেরই পারতে হবে। তার সঙ্গে কিছু টিমটিম করে টিকে থাকা গুটি কয়েক ভদ্রলোক হয়তো যোগ দেবে। অবশ্য ওসব আশা না করাই ভাল। ওরা না পারলে, ঐ মেয়েগুলোর মত অগুন্তি মেয়েদের আর ভারতের অন্য় সবাই কেই ঐ অধঃপতন সহ্য করতে হবে। প্রথম প্রথম হয়ত ভাল লাগবে। ক্রমশ গলায় ফাঁস হয়ে বসতে থাকবে।

কেও কেও হয়ত নিজের যোগ্যতায়, বা ঘুষঘাস দিয়ে, বা অন্য কোন ধান্দাবাজী করে, বা সোজাসুজি illegally কোনো সভ্য দেশে থাকার সুযোগ পাবে। অধিকাংশই সেটা পাবে না, বা পারবে না। তাদের তখন ঐ “দেশপ্রেমিক” হতে হবে। আর আজকাল দেশ মানেই তো- হিন্দি, হিন্দু, হিন্দুস্থান।

এভাবে চললে আজ থেকে দশ বা কুড়ি বছব পর মনে হতেই পারে- "এর থেকে মরে যাওয়া ও ভালো"! কিন্তু তার বদলে ওরা ঐ পুজো আচ্চা আর আর্য সেবা আরও বাড়িয়ে দেবে মনে হয়- ঐ “সাধারন” থেকে “আসাধারন” হওয়ার বা “আর্য” হওয়ার, বা "আমরা" থেকে "ওরা" হওয়ার সাধনায়! মোক্ষ আর সগ্গ সঙ্গে BOGO (Buy One Get One) offer এর মত free! ইহজন্ম সার্থক হলে পরজন্মে কোনো মামু, বা কোই-মাই-কা-লাল, হাত লাগাতে পারবে না। গণেশ তো কোন ছাড়, ব্রক্ষা- বিষ্ণু-মহেশ্বরও চোখ গোলগোল করে ঘাবড়েই থাকবে। তখন সোজা হার্তিক রোশনের সঙ্গে সুইজারল্যান্ডে থাকা আর মাঝেমাঝে বরফে নেংটি পরে উদ্দাম নেত্ত। তান্ডব আর কি। হিন্দি, হিন্দু, হিন্দুস্থান গ্য়ায়া তেল লেনে।

Short URL- https://is.gd/iInj4d

Good, Bad, and Ugly- incidents following Pulwama terror attack shed many lights on Indian society and politics.

2019-03-01T10:21:00.000-05:00

It seems that a large section of Indian society, mainly the middle class and the elites, want peace and not war. So there must not be any war and India will get peace simply because these people want it! So let there be peace- Amen!

Composition and nature of Indian society is playing a huge role in opposing war in general- irrespective of whether it's in national interest or not. Sociopolitical evolution of India plays a crucial part in this issue.

The way a kid succeed in Indian society- starting from his schools days, to university and then professional life including those in executive branch, mainly in bureaucracy and law enforcement, can be of huge importance here too. Now many reports suggest that Indian military is also getting affected by the same issue. The issue is "good boy" culture.

These "good boys" are fully protected by their parents, aloof from the society, get a very privileged life to the best of their parents' ability. And all of it with just one goal- to get a lucrative job to have a comfortable life and ensure equally comfortable live for the parents. Their world revolves around this story line. The progression of their career with that single goal start almost immediately the child is born. It gradually change in shape as the child grows up. In schools, they care only to score as high as possible. Parents bring coconut water, yogurt, fruit and other "healthy snacks" while the "good boy" attend classes- in school or in private tuition. Private tuition and many other "not so harmful" acts of unethical behavior and corruption is not only supported by the parents but also encouraged in many cases. The child care intensifies to the level of torture for such domesticated "good boys" during exams, as parents are equally or, may be more, stressed.

At the end of one's student life, the job they desire are selected based on two main parameters- money and socioeconomic hierarchy. Childhood dream or lounging to join a profession, ability to do the job there, dedication to excel etc. are irrelevant for both the parents and the kid. All concerned parties including the students, their parents, teachers, mentors, and the society as a whole support such "good boys". They always follow orders but love to talk about courage and other such great virtues, mainly in social media. They may watch wrestling matches on TV, war and patriotic movies, and enjoy violent video games. But tend to act totally cowardice when some basic sense of ethics, honesty, or justice arises. They are always asked by their parents to keep themselves away from any conflict or potential conflict, talk only what others want to hear, never argue to authority and so on. Protecting themselves from any harm is inbuilt in such children and almost always remain that way when they grow up. They never interfere in any local or national or social dispute/issue, except in social media, always play safe and never engage in any physical fight even when get formal martial arts training (mainly done for certificates as an extra-curricular activity- for academic purpose to get admission in some prestigious university or job opportunity). Gradually they even stop giving frank opinions in places where it might matter. Lately I realized that many such people stop drinking alcohol in professional parties and even in social gathering in the fear of talking something that might put them in trouble. In the process they lose their ability to access risks besides many other virtues that are so essential for leadership and some even essential for basic decision making in our offices and homes.

These people succeed there to occupy the top positions in almost every institutions and also became one of the main export items for India. Indian media, vast majority of middle class Indians, and the 'elites' are also affected. Relatively poor guys from less privileged background, who aspire to climb the socioeconomic ladder, also try its best to adopt that culture. They imitate the "elites", just like in most other countries. This system is in place since long. That's one of the reasons why that farmers' movement, which started in the village of Naxalbari in 1967, failed so miserably when the "good boys" from cities and "elite" universities joined it.

Now these opportunist, highly selfish but very vocal Indian elites and middle class "intellectuals" want peace at any cost. They think it's the noble duty of others, including our enemies, to give that peace to them on a platter. Their otherwise stable boat, as they perceive, must not be rocked by any war or socioeconomic unrest.

At the same time, many equally vocal middle class Indians are indoctrinated into blind religious and/or political faith. It's just another consequence of India's failing education and sociopolitical system that put too much pressure for compliance of societal norms. These people tend to "support war" but themselves never want to join in it. They surely can offer puja, hold rallies, harassing anyone who dare to oppose their "patriotism". They only can join war if they are given lucrative positions in Indian military as an officer, who are known to enjoy highly feudal and British era luxury at tax payers' expanse. It's generally accepted that hard life of an non-officer army personnel are only for the poorest of the poor who can not be any "good boy" to succeed. These are the people who probably can not even survive with any other decent job in Indian society but to join lower ranking positions.

India's top political class used to be dominated by the "good boys" since long before independence simply because those people were promoted by the British rulers and given (not earned) the privileges to succeed professionally, financially, and also in politics. It would not be wrong to say that both Jawaharlal Nehru and MK Gandhi were among those privileged "good boys". Naturally, they were fine when Pakistan occupied one third of Kashmir. Nehru was also not much opposed to Chinese aggression and never even tried to develop the North Eastern states of India. That time Indian Govt made it the state policy for so many states within India that political leadership thought might be occupied by the Chinese and/or the Pakistanis. Yes, they all wanted peace! That's the start of India's insurgency problems as we see it today.

But that time, immediately after independence, many not-so-good boys, who had a rough childhood; did not have so protective, insecure, and selfish parents; also used to succeed. Such people also used to join executive branch in the Government and also in politics. But that trend gradually declined as social mobility drastically deteriorated in independent India for various reasons. It worsened significantly after globalization of 1991. That situation is again changing for Indian politics lately. Now Indian PM is not any "good boy" guy. He has seen Indian society from the very bottom of it and has a real good grasp over it, understand Indian people better than any one in Gandhi dynasty and other such "good boys" in Indian politics. But he did not seem to learn anything else- either educationally or professionally. It broadly indicate the trend or type of people rising as common man's politicians. Yes, I do not support him in many issues but I must admit the qualities he has, which can be a great asset for the country if used judiciously, guided by wise advisers and honest executives.

In the whole mess, both truth and sense of one's duty got sacrificed. Making logical and sensible decision get harder in today's India. It's equally true for general population who make their decisions based on what others say and what others do. And those "others" are either actual uneducated or poorly educated bad boys or the so called "good boys".

India is now lost in that cacophony of good, bad, and ugly. Previously India used to unite when they could manage to crate an external enemy- be it in politics or sports or anything else. It was the only way to make Indians united. Those days seems to be over now.

Short URL- https://goo.gl/Vm2YFa

Why should USA and other western countries minimize students from countries like India and China, where education, mainly basic education, is ruined, to allow only talented ones to join higher education and research sector in these western countries?

2017-12-21T16:32:00.002-05:00

Most of these developing countries destroyed its own education sector, mainly basic school education for various reasons. I’ll discuss the issue mainly in Indian context. Most of the points are equally valid for other developing countries, including China.

1. The most crucial one would be criminalization of politics and politicization of education. Now, success in a country like India depends more on one's ability to exploit the current culture of sycophancy, corruption and crime- than anything else.

In case of India, it mainly started during Indira Gandhi era around mid 1970s (she was assassinated in 1984). Since then the situation only deteriorated and the rate of destruction only increased so far, valid till today.

Many of these guys, who got western/American education and who became financially successful, open for-profit shops in the name of education there in India- flaunting American connection and attractive Western/American brand names to attract more students- mainly those who are more obsessed with going and/or living in the West or America than getting meaningful education.

It has now became an epidemic and reached its lowest as public education in India is deliberately being destroyed by politicians and almost everyone involved in that sector. Private schools, colleges and universities are mushrooming all over the country. Almost all of them are owned by corrupt politicians, bureaucrats, mafia and other criminals like AMITY university owner Ashok Chauhan, who was charged with fraud in the 1990s by authorities in Germany, where he ran a network of companies. He returned to India and was never extradited. A plastics company in the U.S. also sued Chauhan in 1995 for failing to pay $20 million in debts, which led to an ongoing court battle in India. Now AMITY University is "the most successful private university in India". Such rich private universities by corrupt criminals from countries like India are also penetrating American higher education sector. It’s a worrying development for both India and USA.

Now there is absolutely now doubt that education, both basic school education and higher education, is among the top three sectors which is most corrupt and generate most black money there in India. It’s gains more significance considering that fact that illegal black money accounts about 75 percent of Indian GDP. Some credible reports suggest education sector, mostly operate with tax free non-profit or Non Governmental organization (NGO) status, became the most lucrative and most corrupt sector after recent slum in real estate sector.

2. Private tuition and coaching schools came as a byproduct of politicization and criminalization of that sector. Now most of the schools, colleges, universities and coaching centers are owned by corrupt politicians, bureaucrats, businessmen who have absolutely no idea and/or connection with education sector before.

Now private tuition and coaching schools have destroying Indian education system to its core. Andhra Pradesh, Telengana and Rajasthan type states became the recent hot spots of mass manufacturing of idiots and mediocre students for different professional and other courses including engineering, medical, top civil service positions (e.g. IAS, IPS, IFS etc). Many of us are familiar with Kota, used to be a small town in Rajasthan, which later gained national fame for its high profile and and high pressure coaching schools to enable students to get into various prestigious institutions and lucrative careers in India, and crimes behind it? Another example- 50 Suicides In 60 Days: Dark Reality Of Andhra, Telangana Coaching Centres. Now even a kid in a village have to take private tuition, mostly probably by the same teacher, who is supposed to teach the same syllabus in a (mostly) tuition free government run public school.

About a decade ago, in many states such as Gujarat, Maharashtra and Karnataka, parents spend more money on private coaching for their children that all other items including school fees, transport, books, stationary and uniforms. Now that phenomenon has engulfed almost all of the country. Many teachers are known to run private tuition and well-organized businesses of coaching schools, neglecting their teaching duties in schools/colleges/universities. Such coaching schools and private tuition businesses by influential teachers and administrators are involved in almost every examination in India, including entrance/screening tests. They seemingly have mysterious ability to make highly successful ‘suggestions’ (probable questions in the examinations), influence mark scoring ability and ensuring that students perform well in entrance examinations without even covering the syllabus.

Such private tuition and coaching enabled students score very high in standardized tests that have a defined syllabus and exam pattern. They ranks high in various national and international entrance/screening tests including UPSC (that recruit top bureaucrats in India), GRE, GMAT, TOEFL, SAT, etc. These guys succeed at the cost of dedicated and talented students. Most of the successful ones are from rich and powerful families, as outcome of any competition there is decided based on parental money and/or influence, their connection to the institution and its bosses. Available data shows that the quality of vast majority of these professionals are pathetic, to say the least- both as a professional and as a responsible citizen of the society.

Gradually such immigrants become a social liability for the host country, in case they are allowed to permanently live there. These people already started promoting that culture of rote memorization, suggestion based 'education', private tuition and special coaching classes in countries like USA- mainly in big cities, where there is a huge population of such immigrants.

Enabling honest and talented students with dedication and grit from such developing countries like India and China would have far more benefit for both the host and the native country in the long run.

3. Many sources indicate that there has been a significant increase in forged resumes with fake degrees, and false ‘experience’ certificates from students and professionals from India. It’s indicated that about half of resumes from India have fake degrees while about 90 percent contain fake ‘experience’, many with ‘genuine’ fake certificates purchased from corrupt people and/or companies, mainly body shopping agencies, which mostly operate in the lucrative IT sector. Nonetheless, it seriously affect decent and honest Indian students and professionals.

It’s the byproduct of many issues in Indian society where engaging in corruption is not only socially acceptable but also can be a matter of pride in terms of ‘intelligence and ability’ to be ‘practical’ to succeed. Far too many senior professors, Vice Chancellors, Directors of academic and research institutes and universities are known to be engaged in various issues of professional misconducts like plagiarism in countries like India. These forms of 'minor' corruption and crimes are 'nothing wrong' and accepted among them. That distorted sense of ethics and logic are not something that can go away from the affected individuals when they migrate to other countries or get degrees and jobs abroad. That would invariably affect the society they would be living .

4. Massive migration of foreign student is making it harder for local students, even talented ones, to get admission or afford insanely expensive higher education in American universities. Many, if not most, American universities actually prefer foreign students as those students are more lucrative source to make more money.

These corrupt and/or brain dead idiots already flooded western universities as lucrative customers for the universities. Those graduates naturally became an attractive option for cheaper and easily exploitable manpower for local companies. They are recruited mostly to do mundane routine technician or clerical jobs (including teaching) in universities, IT, R&D and other sectors in countries like USA, UK, Germany etc. That boost profit margin for the company. It’s not much due to shortage of suitable manpower, as the myth of ‘talent shortage’ was and still is being propagated by many companies. Keep in mind that there is a huge glut of underemployed and unemployed American graduates and PhD holders all over the country- The fool’s gold of Ph.D. employment data and Millennial College Graduates: Young, Educated, Jobless

5. Most of the 'successful' students from developing countries are very mediocre student. But most are from rich and powerful families. Increase in number of students from these countries seems to be directly proportional to political and corporate corruption there. They come to western universities mainly to get the stamp of approval from a western university in form of a degree. Many of them would go back to their native countries and occupy powerful positions in either public or private sector companies, that include academia and so called research or R&D industry- due to the same parental money or influence for which they could come to the US/West in the first place. Rich and influential parents would put them in such powerful positions irrespective of merit and other qualities need for the positions. That would put more pressure on local talents to flourish. The cycle of entitlement, culture of corruption and other symptoms of a feudal society strengthens with each passing generation, as we have seen since India got freedom in 1947. Inquisitiveness, intelligence and honesty suffer to prevent local talents and leaders to grow, who could have acted as educational or social or political reformers there.

The possibility for countries like India and China to develop its own talent pool, its own leaders, in real sense, is very low and deteriorating fast.

6. Many of them come only to pass the initial hurdle of immigration and enter the host country. Most of these students have no desire or ability (mostly both) to pursue higher studies or research in any sense of it. But they generally manage a decent job in some local companies as cheaper and easily exploitable manpower to do mostly mundane routine jobs, where critical or independent thinking is not much desired. Such jobs include university faculties and ‘scientists’ in many private and public organizations, besides most IT and managerial jobs in private companies. Keep in mind, most American universities are just another for-profit industry in every practical sense and they too need cheaper manpower as well.

7. These mediocre students from rich or influential families. A large section of these students and professionals harbor very orthodox feudal and racist mentality, believing in caste, gender and other forms of racial discrimination. You may find many Indian or Indian origin people in western countries proudly advertising their association of relationship with white Caucasian people but hardly you can see similar pride advertisement with African origin black or Hispanic- if they at all have it in the first place. It’s consistent with the fact that India is considered ‘the most racist country’ among 70 odd countries surveyed.

It does affect other students in the same group/class- both academically and socially. These kids would be of zero or negative value in the society when they settle in the host country- even though they might be financially successful or productive. It would be more damaging as these students start joining in public policy positions- either directly as a law maker or in a consultant position or individual contributor. In short, they become social liability in the long run. It becomes more problematic as they climb academic or corporate hierarchy and start participating in policy decisions in such organizations, including universities.

8. These students and professionals also have a high tendency to believe and live in a ghetto culture. They feel more comfortable with similar minded people, naturally. They tend to recruit similar type of students/employee when they start climbing employment hierarchy- either as a university faculty or in a private company. That’s not great in terms of promoting merit and equality in the host society. It also erode public trust on those institutions.

9. Many of these ‘highly educated’ Indians, even scientists (by virtue of degree or job hierarchy), are highly conservative and religious fundamentalist. Nature of religion does not seem to make any difference in this regard. The situation got worse in last couple of decades.

It’s assumed that rise of Hindu fundamentalist ‘nationalist’ govt in India got it’s major electoral victory due to its quasi westernized ‘highly educated’ ‘Hindus’- many of them are living abroad- like this Rajiv Malhotra as described in this New York Times article.

Current ‘Hindu nationalist’ Government in India seems to be increasing religious rhetoric and fundamentalism in Indian education and research system and making it ‘increasingly antiscience’ .

There are far too many such Indian origin ‘highly educated’ religious fundamentalists living in USA and other western countries- only to spread religious bigotry in the name of various religions, mainly Hinduism, in its totally distorted interpretation and practice. It’s bad for the host country like USA and India.

10. Such practice creates a very negative image about all Indian students and professionals among a large section of local people. It affect genuinely honest and talented ones too due to stereotyping. Many recruiters flatly refuse to consider otherwise suitable candidates from such minority background while many others hesitate- mainly for influential positions that need decision making, original thinking, trustworthiness and creativity. It does not matter what those companies and people say in public in this era of political and legal correctness. it also becomes a propaganda tool for many white supremacists.

11. USA and other western countries need to attract students, who have the desire and ability (aka, talent) to prosper in the area(s) of their study or work. They should be able to create wealth (not mere wealth management) in form of new technology or product (innovation), develop novel knowledge in their area of study (not mere teaching or publishing, mostly, junk articles that do not have much, even, academic value). Such people generally have self respect and pride for the job they do and life they live. Such students and professionals generally have strong willingness to assimilate and positively contribute to the host society (not just financially by simply paying tax) and have broad agreement with the ideals of secular democracy.

Laws of science and rules of technology, process to groom human creativity does not seem to vary when taught in western universities or for degrees purchased at a huge price. It’s basically the openness of the society, rule of (democratic) laws and trust on public institutions that make the difference. people who do not trust those core principles of (most) western democracies should not come here using education as a excuse or tool. If such people become a majority, then these countries will be like the ones those people were so desperate to leave. American/Western universities need to understand that as well. As we now know that it’s less likely that America/west trained professionals and policy makers would make India and China type countries to become like any productive western democracy or USA either.

USA and other western countries can do a great favor to the developing world by promoting honest talented students and professionals, and not patronizing those corrupt and opportunist people, mostly, rich and powerful elites in countries like India and China, who are actually destroying those countries, making those countries unlivable for decent honest people. Those ‘elite’ people, such corrupt and feudal (increasingly authoritarian) countries are imposing a huge pressure on their own diminishing flock of free spirited, honest and talented people, and also on rest of the world. They are forcing others to clean up the mess they are creating. The cycle of appeasement and corruption need to be stopped if the world need to survive and became a better place to live- for anyone and everyone.

Short URL: https://goo.gl/eEJLDz

Why it’s so difficult for some immigrants to assimilate?

2016-12-06T17:36:00.000-05:00

I was born in India, spent my teenage and early adulthood there. After living in few other countries, I settled in the US like many of us here. During my younger days in India, I used to hear a lot asking me to change, telling me how I misfit there. It’s not always to demean or demoralize or insult me. Many people used the same expression to save me from future failures and other graver miseries that they predicted for me. They thought I ask too many questions, refused to obey many social and religious dictates (or obligations, as others put it), declined to bow down to the socio-economic hierarchy, refuse to bribe and accept corruption in our daily lives as many do, who consider it just another issue of ‘practical sense’.

I like to mention one example. One director of a famous research institute in New Delhi once told me how grossly I misfit in both Indian society and scientific research. He suggested me to get out of India and join some famous British university, where he can manage almost any prestigious scholarship or fellowship for me. He was the selection committee chairman of many such UK bound scholarship and fellowship selection committees. He assured me of my admission there and also great success if I follow his advice. He went one step further by suggesting how I can be greatly benefited by marrying a woman from families like his, who can "put your (my) career and financial success into the right trajectory", as he described during those early days of post-liberalized India of late 1990s. It confused me even more. That big boss of Indian science, who was 'very close' to the ruling party and the greatest political dynasty India ever had, thought that I’m not fit for Indian science and society, yet the same person thought I’m the right candidate not only to succeed but also to marry someone, who he is closed to or related to. All these interactions started when I asked him, what are we supposed to write in the exam for the class, titled ‘protein structure and function’. That powerful director used to take that class, and we were supposed to appear in an external examination (conducted by Jawaharlal Nehru University) on that subject. Most of the time that director used to be absent due to his frequent foreign tours. And when he was present, he used to arrive in the class about 15-20 minutes late for a 45-minute class. Then he used to tell stories of great German railway, autumn in Japan, awesome Niagara Falls and such exotic stuff. We hardly got much lesson on protein structure and function. I was more interested to know protein structure and function, and was equally worried about the exam we were about to appear. This example has many issues, which cripple Indian society and science alike, embedded in one- like- how to get ‘prestigious’ foreign scholarships/fellowships, how to get one’s career on the ‘right track’, how to become 'highly successful’ and, most importantly, how to fit in Indian society and science.

Many times, I find myself on the wrong side of people. One good example would be people, who use religion to celebrate and demand donations from rest of the society. Most of such celebrations can be too noisy and disruptive for any civilized society. I was not much fond of religion and do not believe in God. But it added an extra layer of anger when you come back from a day’s hard work or when you have a critically ill relative and there is 24x7 loud music, religious sermons, noisy firecrackers to celebrate, public roads are blocked, face local hooligans demanding donation for ‘cultural’ or religious celebration and so on. You would end up in a hotter soup if you remind them that you never asked money or caused any discomfort to anyone when you feel like celebrating. These hooligans, often supported by political parties and administration, expect everyone to oblige them. There are enough reasons for them to be convinced that terrorism does work in lawless societies. We all know that the consequences for not obeying would be really troubling, to say it politely. It’s equally useless to ask state or central administration for help. That might make the situation even worse.

Our birth in a specific country, a specific society, religion, race etc. are merely coincidental. We do not even choose our parents. It’s neither my fault, nor any great virtue that I was born to a specific parent, a specific country, society, race, religion, mother tongue etc. I have no obligation to defend it, if that’s not supported by data/fact and logic. In fact, I think it’s better to highlight negative issues so that more informed public opinion can be created to address the issues more effectively. I do not feel any special joy by criticizing any country, society, race, religion; particularly which I’m associated with. Yes, that does hurt. It always feels better to be able to highlight positive aspects of our parents, native country and issues associated with us. But supporting anyone or any issue for wrong reason or based on wrong data not only affect personal credibility but also hurt the honest efforts to address such issues.

Traditionally, mostly the privileged section of Indian society used to go out of India for higher education and job. They are from the so-called 'upper’ caste or upper-class community. These people first time realized the pain of being a minority when they live abroad. The urge to portray India, which is basically ruled by the same people, as a great country is too tempting for them to resist. They also have obvious personal reasons to do that too- to glorify themselves and their ability as socio-political rulers of the country. They do it while interacting with the host society and people there, who have no or limited information about India. On the other hand, the same people also wrongly portray that living and working abroad itself is a great achievement, recognition for personal and professional excellence.

Then there is the other class, the so-called ‘lower’ caste or minority section in India. They hardly had any power and privilege, which the previous class take for granted. These people experience freedom, equality and, even, professional recognition for the first time when they migrated to a developed country. Unfortunately, many of them gradually develop the same urge and refuse to assimilate to the host society. Being an Indian bring these two classes together, as they find it easier to twist and deform truth to play the same game to two different audiences- one in India and among Indian community abroad, while the other for the host society and people there. It gradually develops a sense of entitlement that we see among the ‘elite’ immigrants and refugees. These immigrants and refugees play the same game, exploiting same ignorance of their audience- but for very different and often totally opposite and contradicting objectives. The same game will again be played, but with totally reversed goal if the same people are either deported or lose job and forced to leave the host country. Then they will loudly sign the patriotic song and spread all sorts of stories to show how bad American or the western host society was. For non-Indian audience, it’s their ignorance about India and/or the specific religion, culture etc.; while for Indian audience it’s lack of exposure and information about America or the other host society that make this tactics work. Very few can maintain a balance and have the courage to accept reality as it is.

Then, there are those so-called 'rice Christians’. The term was invented to indicate those non-Christian Indians, who convert to Christianity, highlight Christian connections mainly for personal benefits- like, escaping poverty and/or racial abuse by upper caste people in India, getting visa/jobs abroad, fulfilling political ambition, and so on. Now the term is not always associated with converted Christians. It’s more broadly used to indicate a specific trait. These folks almost always blame India and their initial religion, culture etc. to get sympathy and also the network of Christian organizations, churches and more successful Christians abroad. They often forget or conveniently ignore that assimilation does not mean accepting the dominance of Christian fundamentalism or ideology over other religions, or white supremacy.

My living in a foreign country, my not believing in God, selection of my friends and job are the issues that I personally evaluated before accepting. Those are my conscious decisions. Frankly speaking, I left India as I do not feel much associated with that country and culture, in terms of prevailing socio-political condition. At the same time, India is the country that I’m most familiar with. I know that society, its elites and also the people who barely survive with no or false hope that things will be better for them with grace of God or grace of any specific political party or leader. I do not know any other country so well as I know India- not even USA. But I would give similar or same effort for any other country or society if I know it so intimately.

Many people feel that it’s imperative to live in a country and become part of the system there to have any meaningful impact towards reforming it. That may be true for many, who have the required ability to navigate such a system, ability to compromise on daily basis yet able to oppose, raise voice against socio-political injustices. I tried that route a couple of times, and, always failed. I felt the limitation of that approach and my inability to adjust there. I realized that some people do not have the ability and/or patience to navigate the system in such a semi-feudal and lawless society. Many people feel suffocated there as they cannot talk openly and act reasonably freely with decent honesty, which they feel very essential to start any reform effort. I feel it’s more useful to make myself free from those, mostly, corrupt and morally bankrupt socio-political elites and the system they are so determined to maintain. Now, I can talk openly and act with more honesty. I can have more positive impact on India by staying abroad. It's imperative for me to let underprivileged people know, let general Indians know the reality. Then, it’s up to them to decide their own course of actions- whether to exploit the current situation to promote their own personal interest, or to act to make the situation better. Such immigrants can also help foreign governments, companies, non-profit organizations to deal with such foreign governments and operations in countries like India in a more meaningful way to bring desired outcome in terms of socio-economic development.

I personally do not give much importance to religion and other superstitions in the name of culture and tradition. Truth and science is far more important. At the same time, I do recognize that these are great forces for many, if not most, people in most of the countries in the world. People can die or kill to uphold such ideology or ‘ways of life’. My only request to them- please do not come to a foreign country and society when you do not accept or believe the ways of lives in such more democratic and free societies. No one is preventing such people to practice whatever they believe and make their countries/race/religion better, far better than any other, particularly whom they do not like or aggressively oppose. Let them show the rest of the world that their political or religious and cultural faith are compatible with great scientific achievements, compatible with the vision of a peaceful, prosperous developed country and society that they dream of. Ultimately, their development, becoming more prosperous and peaceful, would help everyone else, including USA.

The first criterion to solve any problem is to acknowledge it. Everything else comes next. All talk of policy and governance would not make much difference if we fail to take that first step. I'm reasonably confident that many Indians like me left India as they associate themselves more closely in more open and secular democracies like USA, without having any hesitation to accept that USA is no way the perfect society. It would be very counterproductive to support or allow such Indians to try to bring all those issues, which many like me left India for, wishing to impose on it on the host society- USA in this case. They are better off in India to help developing India into a better country, better than USA, than trying to convert USA into India.

I'm sure many well-meaning non-resident Indians (NRIs), Indian origin Americans, the citizen of other host countries (by naturalization) and even foreigners would definitely help them in such noble effort- not only because it’s ideologically right and the right thing to do, but also to allow US and such host countries to strengthen/maintain its open society and secular democracy. It’s true for other people too- like those Hindutva forces (which is different from Hinduism that I know), Islamic extremists, Christian fundamentalists and other religious fanatic or so-called patriotic people. I do not think it’s at all possible to have sharia law, madrasa or gurukul education and other religious rituals and yet build a modern, peaceful and prosperous country. I do not believe that anyone can ban cow slaughter, ban pork or beef eating, imposing public inconveniences due to religious extravaganza, having faith on religious mumbo-jumbo and yet develop a peaceful, prosperous country. If anyone thinks otherwise, then they need to prove that in their native countries than migrating and then trying to impose those practices on few remaining 'civilized' or developed part of the world, which is still livable for many people like me.

It’s for the same reason we are still decades, if not centuries, away from having visa free international travel, open border immigration policy or borderless world. For that we need to understand and accept few core values and definition about truth, justice and democracy.

Short URL- https://goo.gl/wtvf7c

Why did Bengal produce so many socio-political leaders, renaissance originate in Bengal and not anywhere else in India?

2016-08-16T11:14:00.019-04:00

I hear a lot and also had to explain a lot why Bengal produced so many socio-political leaders, intellectuals, great writers, artists and so on. Many non-Bengalis refute it as 'Bengal/ Bengali superiority' complex, while others seem to be confused in their search for a rational explanation. But almost everyone agrees that there was a renaissance in Bengal, which was not much present in any other part of India.

Many assign the credit for Bengal renaissance to British education. That is surely a major reason. But not the only or probably the main reason. British and other European powers established many schools, colleges and universities not only in Bengal but also in many other places as well (Annexure- 1).

There are few issues that worked for Bengal, which started long before the Europeans, including the British, arrived there. In fact, the Europeans arrived India via southern or western coast. The first European, Portuguese Vasco da Gama arrived in Calicut, Kerala in 1498. The first British trading ship, the Hector, commanded by William Hawkins, landed in Surat, Gujarat, in 1608, during the reign of Mughal emperor, Jahangir. But the main impact of European as a whole and British in particular was unfolded in Bengal and not in Southern or Western part of India.

Here we need to keep in mind that Bengal was not fully under Delhi and Mughal rule at any time in history. People in that part of India never witnessed repeated invasion and war violence that was a regular affair in northern and western India. The drastic socio-political change imposed by Muslim rulers, who came from central and middle east Asia, was restricted to fewer places and was less dominant in Bengal.

Bengal has a very unique distinction to have among the first democratically elected kings in Asia, Gopala around 755 AD. It traditionally had a very pluralistic, more open society. Had a history of institutionalized education, that include the famous Nalanda University and educational institutions in Gauḍa (currently. Malda), Nabadwip, the place where Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486-1553 CE), the spiritual leader of Baishnab sect was born and spent a significant part of his life, and current HQ of globally famous ISKCON.

Bengal had a vibrant trading history long before the Europeans arrived and the Europeans took advantage of it. Many people there used to be very entrepreneurial risk takers, unlike what we see today. Bengal retained one of the most important trading and business centers during British rule and early part of independent India as well.

These were among the reasons for which the British, initially East India Company, established its capital in Bengal. But the British was little apprehensive about other European powers, mainly the French, who was a global threat to British empire. We also need to keep in mind that all this was before that famous Paris treaty (1763), which was signed after ‘seven years war’ to settle the its dispute with the French (along with Spain and Portugal) in Europe, North America, Africa and Asia. The French had a long history of cooperation with local rulers in India as a whole and Bengal in particular. In case of Bengal it was Nawab Siraj ud-Daulah, head quartered in Musheerabad, about hundred miles north of Kolkata (Calcutta). So the British East India Company established Calcutta (by Job Charnock around 1692) and gradually strengthened it. The suspicion against the French was not unfounded. Siraj ud-Daulah, attacked the British to capture its biggest fort, Fort William in Kolkata, at the instigation of the French. This led to the Battle of Plassey (1757). There the British decisively defeated the Nawab and his French allies, resulting in the extension of British power over the entire province of Bengal and, in every practical sense, in India too.

During British rule, Bengal Presidency included present day West Bengal, Bangladesh, Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa, part of Tripura and Burma. Once the Europeans arrived, they initiated concerted efforts to develop local manpower, mainly to do many of the lower grade jobs in administration, judiciary, law enforcement etc. British needed a lot of trained and skilled manpower to rule over this huge colony. One of the places where such effort took its deepest root was Kolkata. Here we need to remember that British gave similar efforts in other parts of India too but its impact was not so profound. Renaissance did not much happen in those places.

Kolkata was the capital of India till the new capital in New Delhi was inaugurated and became functional in 1931. During this period many Bengali professionals, scholars and thinkers got the opportunity to know British culture, politics, justice system, science, education and, most importantly, modern democracy. We also need to remember that many of the famous Bengali intellectuals who ushered renaissance there got higher education and exposure in Great Britain as well. Not many of the great thinkers and scholars, for which India is still feel proud, originated from Muslim era madrasas or traditional ‘Hindu’ gurukul education.

Besides Britain, few other European powers have its impact on Bengal. It includes the French, Portuguese and Dutch. It gave Bengalis a competitive advantage and a separate yardstick to understand British culture and education. A rather large region around Kolkata was known as ‘Little Europe’ and currently being promoted by West Bengal State Government for tourism.

As British education and socio-cultural evolution gained ground in Bengal, many of its renaissance people were taking shape in almost every field of life- started from education, science and technology, socio-religious reform and most importantly, in freedom struggle, mostly via violent means. Most Bengali freedom fighters, like Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, seemingly had far more impact on British rule than even MK Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, as we are now learning from recently declassified documents by the British government and from other sources in other countries like South Africa. The same sentiment was echoed by many contemporary Indian scholars and freedom fighters like BR Ambedkar.

Overwhelming majority of the prisoners in the notorious cellular jail in Andaman, where the most violent and feared (by the British rulers) freedom fighters were kept, were Bengalis. One can check the list of names of the prisoners, still maintained there in the jail.

Formal education in Bengal probably was not that different than many other parts of India, e.g Tamil Nadu (Madras), Maharashtra (Bombay), where students excelled to become clerks or servants for their European masters. But it’s the socio-political evolution that made Bengal the hotspot of leaders in almost every field. We mostly know about Bengal’s politicians, freedom fighters and few rare mixtures of violent freedom fighters who later became great spiritual leaders like Aurobindo Ghosh, later known as Sri Aurobindo. After renouncing violence, he established the famous ashram in Pondicherry.

All the three major national level political parties in today’s India find its roots in Bengal. Womesh Chunder Bonnerjee was the first president of Indian National Congress. Syama Prasad Mukherjee was the founder of Bharatiya Jana Sangh, which later became Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Manabendra Nath Roy was the founder of Communist Party of India, which initiated communist movement in India and also abroad. He was also the founder of Mexican Communist Party.

Bengal had a rich history of religious diversity, rebellion and reform. Buddhism was one of the dominant religions of Bengal since the days of emperor Ashoka (304—232 BC). It continued to thrive till 12th century. It reached the pinnacle around 750 AD and 1150 AD, mainly under the guidance of Pala Kings initiated by Gopala, arguably the among the first democratically elected kings in the world. It started its decline as Hindu Sena dynasty came to power and crushed Buddhism. Surviving Buddhists retreated to the Chittagong area, bordering Myanmar. The Muslim invaders put the death nail by destroying Buddhist monasteries in Bengal, as they did in other parts of India under its rule.

Religious reformers like Chaitanya Mahaprabhu started raising voice against Brahmin and upper caste domination and caste based hatred among Hindus. He is also credited to prevent rampant conversion of Hindus, mainly ‘lower’ caste Hindus to Islam, slowing down the fast spread of Islam in contemporary society. There were many other unorthodox Hindu preachers who denied ‘sanatan Hindu dharma’ and its rituals.

Traditionally non-Brahmins and non-Kshatriyas dominated Bengal. Sen, Ghosh, Dutta, Bose, Pal (Paul) used to be the major players. The traditional upper caste dominance was almost non-existent in Bengal till very late when Ballal Sen of Sena dynasty imported some Brahmins from Kannauj area in present day Uttar Pradesh. Some think he merely revived, while others think he introduced caste based social hierarchy in Bengal. Here we need to keep in mind that his son, Lakshman Sen (1178-1206 CE) was the last Hindu king of Bengal. He was defeated by Muhammad bin Bakhtiyar Khilji, the same person who destroyed the famous Nalanda University, to start Muslim rule in Bengal.

Religious (Hindu) preachers like Ramakrishna and his famous disciple, Swami Vivekananda preached against caste division among Hindus. Both had a very different interpretation of Hinduism, in stark contrast to that of Adi Shankara. Swami Vivekananda went one step further and prescribed not only non-veg but also beef eating among Hindus. Vivekananda was quoted saying, “When his disciple Chakravarti asked his opinion about consuming non-vegetarian food, Swami Vivekananda ordered him to eat fish and meat as much possible to become healthy and courageous. He once proudly recalled of ancient Hindu society of beef eating Brahmins and advised the youths of India to be strong so that they could understand Gita better, with biceps".

Bengal did and still do not have much presence of Kshatriyas, the warrior or the king class, unlike many other parts of India. Folklore and mythology assign that credit to saint Parashuram, who vowed to get rid of Kshatriyas. Such historical facts set the stage for subsequent socio-political leaders to take advantage of with their more educated and liberal mind enriched with western democracy.

Bengal’s open culture affected religious minorities too, mainly the Muslims, who were mostly the converts from lower caste Hindus. Many Bengali Muslims and Christians were revolutionary in their teaching, writing and vision- e.g Lalon phokir, Kazi Nazrul Islam, Michael Madhusudan Dutta. Attachment towards Bengali language, culture and much liberal interpretation of religion among Bengalis played an important role during liberation war (Mukti Yudha) in East Pakistan around early 1970s, to create independent Bangladesh. Language Movement (Bhasha Andolôn) in East Pakistan during mid 1950s helped making the ground for liberation war later.

Raja Ram Mohan Roy almost single handedly able to convince the British rulers to legally ban burning of widows and allowing remarriage of Hindu widows. That earned him the title ‘the father of the Indian renaissance’. Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar (reconstructed the Bengali alphabet, reformed Bengali typography into an alphabet and promoted widow re-marriage), Sir Ashutosh Mukherjee and his wife Basanti Devi, parents of BJP founder Shyama Prasad Mukherjee (for literacy, mainly for local people in local language and for girls), Acharya Prafulla Chandar Roy (against caste division, promoting science education among Hindus and cultivating wealth creation by objective scientific research and entrepreneurship), writers like Rabindranath Tagore, Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay, Bibhutibhushan Bandopadhyay, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay and many more contributed immensely to that cause of breaking socio-religious superstitions, bigotry and socio-political reform to establish a more just and democratic society and wealth creation from within. These are few reasons why Bengali literature is so rich and also equally matured, even in global standard. The only noble prize in literature, in India, went to a Bengali, Rabindra Nath Tagore, who was far more than just a romantic and a critical writer who touched almost every issue of human life there in Bengal.

Many talented people from other parts of India were also immensely influenced while staying and working in Bengal. The notable examples would be CV Raman, the first and so far, the only Indian to get Nobel Prize in science. He got the prize in 1930 while working in Calcutta University with many other equally talented scientists. Then comes the RSS founder Keshav Baliram Hedgewar. His life and later socio-political activities was hugely influenced by his stay in Kolkata as a medical student, where he got to know and interacted with many Bengali intellectuals and freedom fighters like Pulin Bihari Das, Aurobindo Ghose.

It’s unfortunate that people who sacrificed the most during freedom struggle, knew the country, its people and its culture much better, were sidelined during the last part of Indian freedom movement and in independent India. That ignorance and immaturity is still continuing and also reflected in many colonial era laws, irrelevant public policy in present day India that include caste based reservation, separate laws for different religion. It would not be unfair to say that we failed to a great extent in our goal to make India a vibrant, prosperous democracy with rule of law, equal and democratic law, for every citizen with unbiased law enforcement.

We still say 'Bengal renaissance'. It easily could have been 'Indian renaissance which started in Bengal', just like European renaissance started in Italy and then spread almost all over Europe. A society or country develops when it duly acknowledges its past, learn its lesson from its history but do not enjoy living in the past or bask in past glories. Understanding and accepting our past is very important to build more productive future, a better future. And it must be based on facts and logic, not just some manufactured narrative to suit personal or political agenda or other form of utopia of ‘Ram Rajya’.

"Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it" and most unlikely to prosper in the future. India as a whole and Bengal in particular lost and keep on losing the people who have wisdom and courage to swim against the tide, stand up against the herd mentality that is being perpetuated in the name of culture, tradition, religion, politics or, even, peace.

Annexure 1:

These are the oldest colleges/universities in India- Serampore College (1818), Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee (1847), University of Mumbai (1857), University of Madras (1857), University of Calcutta (1857), Aligarh Muslim University (1875), Allahabad University (1875).

Some of the oldest medical colleges in India are- École de Médicine de Pondichérry (1823, currently known as Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Pondicherry), Calcutta medical College, Kolkata (1835), Madras Medical College, Chennai (1835), Escola Médico-Cirúrgica de (Nova) Goa (1842, currently known as Goa Medical College), Grant Medical College, Mumbai (1845), Christian Medical College, Vellore (1900), King George's Medical University, Lucknow (1911), Patna Medical College, Patna (1925).

Short URL- goo.gl/sWpga7

Indian history, Islamic terrorism and optimism for a peaceful coexistence

2015-12-18T14:44:00.012-05:00

I watched a nice talk in YouTube by the former senior medical officer of Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Mumbai, titled, “Why Did Muslim Rulers Destroy Hindu Temples? Facts and Myths”. I learned many facts that I did not know before. But few of my friends doubted credibility of some of the facts mentioned there. I am not any historian and cannot vouch for credibility of all the facts.

It's widely believed in India that almost all the ‘secular’ political parties and its loyalists appease and exploit religious minorities for electoral gain, distort facts to suit its own narrative of history. Misuse of religious sentiments and racial intolerance have worsened after current Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, came to power. But India got the dubious distinction to become the most racially intolerant country in the world, jointly with Bangladesh and Jordan, before Modi led BJP won last general election in 2014.

To me, it does not matter why those Muslim ‘invaders’ came to India, other than wealth and setting up a kingdom of its own, like any other king of that time, how many Hindu temples were destroyed or how many people were killed by them. We must accept that none can change the past. But we can learn from it, so that we can avoid making the same mistake and build a better future- as a country where all of its citizens can live peacefully with shared prosperity.

In reality, all human came from central Africa. Then they migrated all over the world. There are two alternative theories on when first human arrived in India. One theory says modern human (Homo Sapiens) arrived in India around 70,000 years ago. The other theory postulate arrival of a closely related Homo heidelbergensis, who left Africa about 800,000 years ago, reached India about 250,000 years ago while modern human (Homo sapiens) evolved in Africa about 190,000 years ago. We do not know if modern human and Homo heidelbergensis interbred and mixed genetically or to what extent. But we do know that Modern humans out competed the Neanderthal natives, so-called hobbits, in western Europe, but they did interbreed and it has huge consequence on subsequent human evolution and spread of civilizations as we see it today.

It will not be unfair to say that Indian Hindus and Muslims, who are mostly converted Hindus, came from abroad. Latest data show that upper caste Indians (mainly North Indians) are genetically closer to West European ancestry (so-called Aryans) than ‘indigenous’ Indian people, mainly the local tribes in north India and distinctive southern Indian population. Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations, Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown. One estimate postulate that ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to, 4200 years ago.

Violence and hatred in the name of religion or caste or any such issue is basically ignorance, compounded by a very innate human nature to prove its own individual supremacy. People of different faith or religion, race etc are interacting more, live in more multi-cultural societies these days. The consequence of something or fault of someone else is quickly passed onto others very fast these days. Local issues are not so local or limited in its impact. World refugee crisis and global Islamic terrorism, including so-called ‘lone wolf’ attacks inspired by extreme religious ideology from abroad, are not so uncommon.

Muslims are the worst victim of sectarian and/or religious violence in the name of Islam. The most favored destinations of refugees displaced due to religions or caste or tribal conflicts worldwide, are western secular democracies like USA and countries in western Europe. Muslims are no exception. Indian history provide an excellent opportunity to understand it. Western world is relatively new in this game, openly acknowledged Islamic terrorism mainly after 9/11 terror attack.

More we learn and analyze, more we realize the need to treat the ignorance and our human desire to prove individual supremacy. We can get a very realistic, practical example during our marriage, when most of us try to defame, demean the in-laws, find fault in others during marriage. For many it become a constant thorn in conjugal relationship in subsequent years. To solve the issues, we need to accept faults of both the sides without being biased. The target is to make that relationship and marriage successful, happy; and not to prove whose family is better, more civilized, more educated, more cultured etc. The same analogy is equally valid for religious intolerance, hatred and terrorism.

It does not matter much even if Babur or other Muslim kings came and ruled India with a very bad intention of insulting Hindus, destroying ‘Indian’ culture, which does not seem to be true. Most importantly, we cannot undo it. We better target the ideology of supremacy than the people following such irrelevant or distorted ideology. The war on Islamic terrorism can never be won by using only force in India or Europe or America or middle-east or other parts of the world. It will also be counter-productive to ban Muslims from entering USA, as some American politicians are suggesting.

Muslims need to understand that everything written in Quran is not right and cannot be the basis to live one's life, particularly in a multi-cultural, secular democracy. Yes, I read Quran (English translation, of course). There are too many verses in Quran that openly incites hatred and violence, mainly against non-believers. Many more against women and other minorities. Throwing few verses of peace from Quran or loudly chanting, “Islam is the religion of peace” would not help much. It would not erase the fact that there is not a single country in this world with Muslim majority population where religious minorities flourished and its population increased, based on percentage of total population. The rate of decrease of minorities cannot be explained simply by the difference in birth rate. On the other hand, the number of Muslims almost always increased in any secular democracy, including India, USA and UK. It's also factually true that all the countries that give death penalty to non-believers and homosexual or LGBT people are Islamic countries or Muslim majority country.

We are yet to understand why so many Muslims in non-Muslim majority or non-Islamic countries think they should be allowed to follow Islamic Sharia law, in totality or selectively. About 51% Muslims in USA, 62% in Canada, 40% in UK, 42% in Russia and 77% in Thailand think that way. Generally speaking, support for Sharia among Muslims is very high in most Islamic countries in Africa and Asia, mainly where Quranic study is mandatory and judiciary is based on Sharia.

Some secular democracies, like India, partially adopted Sharia for Muslims. It has a huge socio-political consequence. Many Indians are demanding abolishing such religion based laws there. It's little more baffling considering the fact that support for Sharia law is far lower in many Islamic or Muslim majority countries, e.g. Turkey and Albania 12%, Lebanon 29%,Kazakhstan 10%. Such data from India is not available, as expected. It seems that Indian policy makers rely more on political correctness, personal faith and electoral equation than hard data and logic to make and enforce laws and other public policy issues.

Here, we need to understand that Sharia law does not come from Quran, but was inspired by Quran and teaching of Prophet Muhammad, as its followers perceive it (this is very crucial). There are only few verses in Quran dealing with legal matters. The classic Sharia law took shape around 900 AD, long after Prophet Muhammad’s death in 632. Islamic specialists in legal matters in Middle Eastern Arab countries assembled handbooks for judges to use in making their decisions. Sharia was not a code of laws, but a body of religious and legal scholarship which continued to develop for the next thousand years.

The experience of Hamtramck, MI, the Muslim majority city in the USA is not that great for most non-Muslim residents there and rest of America. Once the Muslims got majority in the city, they changed city law and gave permission to broadcast its call to prayer (Azan) from loudspeakers atop its roof. It also started teaching Quran in public schools. If the Muslim residents were so annoyed by church bells, as their leaders claim in the BBC report, they should petition city council to stop or minimize Church bells during weekend prayers, rather than starting their own 7 days a week and 5 times a day loud affair. It must not be allowed in any civilized secular democracy. It raises concern for non-Muslims when Muslims become majority. Such experiences seem to have helped Michigan Governor to be among the first to oppose Syrian refugee resettlement in USA and most importantly in the state of Michigan.

After talking to few educated Muslims from around the world, I realized that people who follow Islam and believe in every word of Quran, do not agree that religion is a personal matter and must remain personal. They also do not agree in the definition of justice, the way we in the western world and other democracies believe, i.e., in short, “greater good for larger number of people”. It's very disturbing.

It seems that many moderate Muslims who were brought up in western societies (e.g. Irshad Manji) are more interested in changing the interpretation of many of the verses of Quran. They do not say that everything written in Quran is not true or right, Quran cannot be the basis for living in modern civilized societies, and, one can remain a devout Muslim despite of not accepting each and every word in Quran.

Many do believe that extremist groups like Islamic State (IS or Daesh), Taliban, Al-Quida etc. actually interpret Quran more accurately, accept as it’s written. We hear so much about IS these days, mainly due to its very brutal rule and practice of Islam. All western and even most conservative Islamic countries like wahhabi Sunni Saudi Arab and Shia Iran oppose IS. They are engaged in intense military conflict in Syria and Iraq. All these governments want to establish 'representative government' there. Most of these military powers, except Russia and Iran (who support Syrian regime), bet on non-IS rebel groups. But a recent poll says that about 60% in these Syrian rebel groups support IS ideology.

Perception of Islam by these extremists and terrorists would not change much by the peaceful verses in Quran. They will find enough motivation from many other verses that preach violence, hatred and dominance over others.

Educated and moderate Muslims need to understand that they have to come out aggressively and assertively, as few rare Muslims are trying. Many educated Muslims living in western countries or other secular democracies do not practice Islam in day-to-day life. But they are reluctant to admit that openly. It can be for several reasons, including fear of being ostracized by their Muslim friends and relatives and fear from the extremists. But they have a bigger responsibility, as they are the people who are more interested to live in prosperous, peaceful secular democracies compared to those who believe in extremism in the name of Islam in middle east or other parts in Islamic world.

Ultimately, the reform of Islam has to come from within, within the Muslim community. Such change can never be successful or sustainable if imposed from outside or via force. Educated and moderate Muslims have to assert the Muslims from less fortunate background that one can still remain a Muslim by accepting that everything written in Quran is not right. Moreover, they do not need any certificate from anyone else, religious priests or otherwise, to decide how to become or remain a Muslim, so long they are following the law of the land, remain ethical and honest to their duties as a human being. It’s equally applicable to any other issue of racial intolerance to prevent downfall of any society and country. The impact of Quran is more profound on Muslims than Bible over Christians, or Gita over Hindus.

One example is dietary restrictions based on religious belief- like eating pork or beef. Pork is equally banned for Christians (as per Bible-Old Testament) and Jews, for the same reason as in Islam- “it’s unclean, as it has split hooves and do not chew cud”. Many, if not most, Christians and Jews eat pork and openly admit it. Many Hindus do not eat beef thinking that it’s banned by Hindu religion. Then, there are many Hindus who eat beef. The famous Hindu philosopher and social reformer Vivekananda was among them. I wish I could tell the same about Muslims.

For me, it’s not so important why the Muslim rulers came and set up its empire in Hindu India. It’s more important what can we learn from our history to make a better, more prosperous and peaceful future for all of us. Everyone likes to live peacefully and help their children to have a better life. Sustained peace is possible only via justice or righteousness. The educated and moderate Muslims can do it. But it can happen only when they themselves are convinced. Mere lip service or fear would not help. Otherwise, neither Islamic terrorism nor this 'conflict of civilizations' will end peacefully. Chanting the mantra of peace does not guarantee peace, neither wishful thinking is any strategy to solve any issue. At the end of the day, people will get what they deserve. It doesn't matter much if they like the outcome or not.

পুজোর গল্প (১৪২২)- গোপীনাথরা আজকাল আর বোর হয় না

2015-10-15T10:24:00.002-04:00

পুজোর গল্প (১৪২২)

সত্যি মিথ্যে জানি না, তবে গল্পটা ভাল। বেশ কিছুদিন আগে বিশ্বজোড়া (মায়া(জালের দৌলতে আমার বুদ্ধিমান দূরভাস যন্ত্রে এটা পেলাম। শুদ্ধ এবং সম্মানিয় বাংরেজি ভাষায় বললে, internet এর দৌলতে আমার smart-phone এ পেলাম। আমি অবশ্য ঐ গল্পটা বলার জন্য এটা লিখতে শুরু করি নি। এ বোর কিন্ত সে ইংরেজি 'বোর', অর্থাৎ বরাহের একঘেয়ে বিরক্তি নয়। এটা আবার দাবার বোড়ে বা বোরো চাষের গল্পও নয়। আপাতত্, বোরেকে বোরের মত থাকতে দাও। যথা সময়ে, বয়স আরও দশ মিনিট বাড়লে, সব জানতে পারবে।

আসল গল্পে যাবার আগে internet এ পাওয়া গল্পটা সংক্ষিপ্তাকারে বিস্তারিত বলে নেওয়া যাক। এখানে বলে নেওয়া ভাল- যে সব পাঠক বিজ্ঞানের কচকচি পচ্ছন্দ করেন না তারা পরের পরিচ্ছেদ, "এবার আসল গল্প শুরু করা যাক্", থেকে শুরু করতে পারেন।

এক বিশ্ববিখ্যাত বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ে পদার্থবিজ্ঞান পরীক্ষায় প্রশ্নটা এসেছিল। “একটি ব্যারোমিটারের সাহায্যে কিভাবে একটি গগণচুম্বী বহুতল ভবনের উচ্চতা নির্ণয় করা যায়- বর্ণনা কর।”

একজন ছাত্র উত্তর দিল- “ব্যারোমিটারের মাথায় একটা দড়ি বাঁধতে হবে। এরপর ব্যারোমিটারটিকে ভবনের ছাদ থেকে নীচে মাটি পর্যন্ত নামাতে হবে। তাহলে ব্যারোমিটারের দৈর্ঘ্য আর দড়ির দৈর্ঘ্য যোগ করলেই ভবনের উচ্চতা পাওয়া যাবে।”

এরকম সোজাসাপ্টা উত্তর অসীম জ্ঞানী প্রফেসর এবং পরীক্ষককে এমন রাগিয়ে দিল যে তিনি ততক্ষণাত ছাত্রটিকে ফেল করিয়ে দিলেন। ছাত্রটি বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের কাছে আবেদন করলে বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় একজন নিরপেক্ষ বিচারক নিয়োগ করলো ব্যাপারটা মীমাংসা করার জন্য।

বিচারক দেখলেন, উত্তরটি সম্পূর্ণ ঠিক, কিন্তু পদার্থবিজ্ঞানের কোন উল্লেখযোগ্য জ্ঞান উত্তটির মাঝে অনুপস্থিত। তাই তিনি ব্যাপারটির মীমাংসা করার জন্য ঠিক করলেন, ছাত্রটিকে ডাকবেন এবং তাকে ছয় মিনিট সময় দেবেন। এই ছয় মিনিটের মধ্যে ছাত্রটিকে মৌখিকভাবে প্রশ্নটির এমন উত্তর দিতে হবে যার সঙ্গে পদার্থবিজ্ঞানের মৌলিক নীতিগুলির নূন্যতম সম্পর্ক আছে।

ছাত্র এল। এসে চুপচাপ পাঁচ মিনিট ধরে কপাল কুচকে বসে চিন্তা করতে লাগল। বিচারক তাকে সতর্ক করে দিলেন যে তার সময় শেষ হয়ে যাচ্ছে। ছাত্রটি বলল, তার কাছে কয়েকটি যথাযোগ্য উত্তর আছে, কিন্তু সে ঠিক করতে পারছে না কোনটা সে বলবে। বিচারক তাকে তাড়াতাড়ি করতে বললে ছাত্রটি যে উত্তরগুলো দিল-

“প্রথমত আপনি ব্যারোমিটারটা নিয়ে ছাদে উঠবেন, এরপর ছাদের সীমানা থেকে ব্যারোমিটারটা ছেড়ে দেবেন এবং হিসাব করবেন মাটিতে পড়তে ব্যারোমিটারটির কতটুকু সময় লাগল। এরপর h=(0.5)*g*t² সূত্রটির সাহায্যে আপনি ভবনের উচ্চতা মেপে ফেলতে পারবেন। কিন্তু এতে ব্যারোমিটারটার দফারফা হয়ে যাবে।”

“অথবা যদি রোদ থাকে তাহলে ব্যারোমিটারটার দৈঘ্য মাপবেন। এরপর ব্যারোমিটারটাকে দাঁড় করিয়ে এর ছায়ার দৈঘ্য মাপবেন। এরপর ভবনের ছায়ার দৈঘ্য মাপবেন। এরপর অনুপাতের ধারণা ব্যাবহার করে কিছুটা হিসাব কষলেই ভবনের উচ্চতা পেয়ে যাবেন।”

“কিন্তু আপনি যদি এ ব্যাপারে বাড়াবাড়ি রকমের বিজ্ঞানমুখী হতে চান তাহলে আপনি ব্যারোমিটারের মাথায় ছোট একটা সুতা বেঁধে প্রথমে মাটিতে তারপরে ভবনের ছাদে পেন্ডুলামের মত দোলাবেন। এইক্ষেত্রে অভিকর্ষ বলের সংরক্ষণশীলতার কারণে T=2*π²*(l/g) সূত্র থেকে ভবনের উচ্চতা বের করতে পারবেন।”

“অথবা যদি ভবনটির কোন বহিঃস্থ জরুরী নির্গমন (শুদ্ধ বাংলায় বললে- emergency exit) সিঁড়ি থাকে, তাহলে আপনি সেখান বেয়ে ব্যারোমিটারের দৈঘ্য অনুযায়ী ব্যারোমিটার দিয়ে মেপে মেপে ভবনের উচ্চতা বের করে ফেলতে পারেন।”

“আর আপনি যদি একান্তই প্রথাগত এবং বিরক্তিকর পথ অনুসরণ করতে চান তাহলে, প্রথমে ব্যারোমিটারটা দিয়ে ছাদের উপর বায়ুচাপ এবং পরে মাটিতে বায়ুচাপ মাপবেন। এরপর বায়ুচাপের পার্থক্যকে মিলিবার থেকে ফিটে বা মিটারে পরিনত করলেই ভবনের উচ্চতা পেয়ে যাবেন।”

“কিন্তু, নিঃসন্দেহে, সবচেয়ে ভাল পদ্ধতি হবে ভবনের রক্ষণাবেক্ষনের দায়িত্বপালন করে যে তার কাছে যাওয়া এবং তাকে বলা, “যদি আপনি একটি সুন্দর নতুন ব্যারোমিটার পেতে চান, তাহলে আপনাকে বলতে হবে এই বহুতল ভবনটির উচ্চতা কত!”

এবার আসল গল্প শুরু করা যাক্।

ঐ বিদেশি ছাত্রের জায়গায় ভারতের বা বাংলার গোপীনাথ থাকলে এবং একই উত্তর দিলে কি হত?

প্রথমে গোপীনাথ সম্পর্কে বলা উচিত। আমাদের গোপীনাথ নিশ্চীন্দপুরে থাকে আর গোবিন্দপুরের সরকারি মহাবিদ্যালয়ে পড়ে। গোবিন্দপুর মফস্বল শহর হলেও নিশ্চীন্দপুরকে গ্রাম বলাই ভাল। গোপীনাথের বাবা তিনকড়ি ওখানকার সকলের পরিচিত ডাক্তারবাবু। ঐ গ্রামের ডাক্তার আর কি। পয়সা বা দাপট কোনটাই তেমন নেই, যদিও তখনকার দিনে দেশের সেরা কলকাতা মেডিকেল কলেজ থেকে পাস করা। তবে লোকে ভক্তিশ্রদ্ধা, মান্যগন্নি করে। টাকা পয়সার থেকে চাষের ধান, পুকুরের মাছ, জমির কুমড়ো ইত্যাদি বেশি দেয়। চুন-পান-মিষ্টি আর বিছুটিমূল পার্টির মধ্যে ঝামেলা, বা, গ্রামের মাতব্বররা নিজেদের বিশ্বাস করতে না পারলে বা একমত না হতে পারলে তিনকড়ি ডাক্তারের ডাক পরে। তাই তিনি গ্রামের মন্দির পূনর্গঠন কমিটির কোষাধ্যক্ষ।

তা তিনকড়ি সাধ্যের প্রায় বাইরে গিয়ে ছেলেকে কাছের ঝিকড্ডে হাইস্কুলের বদলে শহরের মহাবিদ্যালয়ে ভর্তি করাতে রাজি হয়েছিল নানা কারণে। তারমধ্যে বৌয়ের কথা, না, ছেলের ভবিষ্যত কোনটা বেশি গুরুত্ব পেয়েছিল এখন আর সেটা কারুর মনে নেই। তবে তার জন্য তিনকড়ির অনেক খরচ হয়েছে। তিন তিনটে প্রাইভেট টিউসন (অবশ্য তাতে গোপীনাথের তেমন কিছু হাতি ঘোড়া উন্নতি যে হয়নি, তা বলাই বাহুল্য)। বিমলদার কোচিং আলাদা। ওখানে নাকি ‘সাজেসন’ খুব ভাল পাওয়া যায়। তবে টাকাটা একটু নয়, বেশ অনেকটাই বেশি নেয়। তা, ভাল জিনিষের তো দাম বেশিই হবে। শুধু সম্ভবনার ওপর ভিত্তি করে কেও অত পয়সা দেয় না। ঝুনঝুনওয়ালা কোচিং আরও ভাল। তবে পয়সা আরও বেশি। সরস্বতী, অর্থাৎ গোপীনাথের মা, তার বরকে আর বেশি চাপাচাপি করে নি। কে জানে কখন মতি বিগড়য় আর এগুলোও না বন্ধ করে দেয়।

এখানেই শেষ নয়। গোবিন্দপুরে সরকারি মহাবিদ্যালয়ে ভর্তি করান বেশ ঝকমারির কাজ। অনেক টাকা তো গেছেই, তার ওপর নানান্ “ওচাঁ, মনুষ্যেতর” (তিনকড়ির ভাষায়) লোকজনদের অনুনয় বিনয় করতে হয়েছে। ওটা তিনকড়ির আত্মসম্মানে অনেক বেশি আঘাত দিয়েছে। নানা লোক, পার্টির দাদা, এমনকি ওখানকার পদার্থবিদ্যার অপদার্থ অধ্যাপক, বিমান রাযচৌধুরিকেও দিতে হয়েছে।

বছর দশেক আগে মার্কিন যুক্তরাষ্ট্র ফেরত পদার্থবিদ্যার অধ্যাপক বিমান রায়চৌধুরি (HS, BSc, MSc, MPhil., PhD, FNA, FASc, PMP, MBA etc. etc.) শিক্ষক বা মাস্টারমশাই কথাগুলোকে একেবারেই সহ্য করতে পারেন না। তার পছন্দ প্রফেসর। তবে, অধ্যাপক বললে কিছু বলেন না। উনি আগে চুন-পান-মিষ্টি পার্টির কর্মাধ্যক্ষ ছিলেন। তার জোরেই নাকি চাকরি। ওনার বাবা-কাকারা ভারত ভাগ হবার পর পূর্বপাকিস্থান থেকে এসে কলকাতায় চুন-পান-মিষ্টি পার্টি করে সরকারি চাকরির উচুঁ পদে ওঠার সুবাদে অনেক পয়সা আর প্রভাব অধ্যাপক রায়চৌধুরির বিদেশে উচ্চশিক্ষা আর দেশে ফিরে সরকারি চাকরি পাবার অন্যতম কারণ।

অধ্যাপক রায়চৌধুরি নাকি কলকাতার এক বিখ্যাত কলেজে পড়বার সময় নকশাল আন্দোলনে একটু বেশিই আন্দোলিত হয়ে পড়েছিলেন। আর অন্যান্য বুদ্ধিমান গরীব-দরদী দেশপ্রমী নকশাল ছাত্রনেতাদের মত উনিও চিন বা রাশিয়া ছেড়ে, আমেরিকাতেই পড়তে এবং থাকতে গেছিলেন। কপাল খারাপ। তাই ওখানে চাকরি না পাবার পর দেশপ্রেম ও সমাজতন্ত্রের মাহাত্য পুণরায় বুঝতে দেশে প্রত্যাবর্তন। তা চেষ্টা করলে কি একটা কাজ-চলা গোছের চাকরি পেওয়া যেত না? দেশে ফিরে কিছু একটা ডাক্তার, ইজ্ঞিনিয়ার, ম্যানেজার, নিদেনপক্ষে আইটি বা সায়ন্টিস্ট বললে কেও কিছু সন্দেহ করত না। ওরকম তো কতই হচ্ছে। অনেক বাংলা শব্দের মত, বৈজ্ঞানিক কথাটাও ঠিক ওজনদার নয়, বলে মন ভরে না, আর লোকেও বলে না। তাই সায়ন্টিস্টই বললাম।

চুন-পান-মিষ্টি পার্টির দাপুটে নেতা, কলকাতার লেখক-ভবনে উচ্চপদে আসীন সরকারী আধিকারিকের ছেলে, বাড়ীতে জনা পাঁচেক চাকর-বাকর-রাঁধুনি-ড্রাইভার, সারাক্ষণ মোসাহেব পরিবেষ্টিত থাকা; আর, আমেরিকার সাম্যের চোটে আর পাঁচটা সাধারণ লোকের মত থাকা কি এক হলো? তা অবশ্য ওখানকার বঙ্গসমিতি মার্কা দেশীয় সংগঠনগুলোর অনুষ্ঠান আর আড্ডাগুলোতে কিছু মোসাহেব সবসময় জুটে যেত। কিন্তু, দুধের স্বাধ কি ঘোলে মেটে? অনেকের মিটলেও, আমাদের একদা নকশাল করা, উচ্চবংশের সাম্যবাদী বঙ্গসন্তানটির মেটে নি।

এর মধ্যে বেশ কিছু অবশ্য নিল্দুকের রটনাও বলে অনেকে। তবে, আরও সব করিৎকর্মা মহান বিদ্দজ্জনদের মত ইনিও সরকার পরিবর্তনের পর এখন সব তন্ত্রটন্ত্র ছেড়ে বিছুটিমূল পার্টির জেলা সভাপতি। আড়ালে অনেকে ওনাকে সভা-পত্লিও বলে। তা আড়ালে নিন্দুক তো ছেড়ে দিলাম, অনেক নিজের লোকই তো কত কিছু বলে। সে সব ভাবার সময় বা দরকার এসব কর্মবীর লোকের থাকে না। অধ্যাপক রায়চৌধুরিও নেই।

তবে বাবারও বাবা থাকে। সেই সব দাদুর নাতিদের জায়গা করে দিতে, আর চুন-মূল, তথা চুমূল পরিবর্তনের জন্য এই ধ্যাড়ধ্যাড়ে গোবিন্দপুরে পড়ে থাকা। নয়তো অধ্যাপক রায়চৌধুরির মত প্রতিভাদের কলকাতার নামী কলেজ বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়েই মানায় বেশি। ওখানেই ওনারা বেশি শোভা পান। যাইহোক, ওনার কথা যথা সময়ে আবার বলা যাবে।

গোপীনাথ নিজে স্থানীয় ঝেকড্ডে সরকারি উচ্চবিদ্যালয়ে পড়তে ইচ্ছুক। তার প্রায় সব বন্ধুরাই ওখানে পড়বে- অবশ্য যে কজনের বাবা-মা পড়াতে পারবে। তিনকড়িরও তাতে সায় ছিল। কিন্ত সরস্বতী বেঁকে বসে। ওখানে পড়লে নাকি ইহকাল আর পরকাল দুটোই ঝড়ঝড়ে হয়ে যাবে। গোবিন্দপুরে সরকারি মহাবিদ্যালয়ে কত বড় বড় সব অধ্যাপক। বিলেত ফেরতও বেশ কিছু আছে। সবথেকে বড় কথা- কলকাতার বিখ্যাত লোক ঝুনঝুনওয়ালারা ঐ মহাবিদ্যালয়ের সঙ্গে যুক্ত। ওদেরইত কত বড় বড় সব কোচিং স্কুল। ওদের ওখান থেকে পড়লে ডাক্তারি, ইজ্ঞিনিয়ারিং, IIT, IIM, AIIMS প্রভৃতি নামিদামি জায়গায় ভর্তি; Tata, Infosys, IAS, IPS আরও সব কত বড় বড় জায়গায় চাকরীর সম্ভবনা। তার থেকেও বড় কথা, বিদেশ যেতে পারবে। আর তা নাও যদি হয়, নিদেন পক্ষে কলকাতা, দুর্গাপুর, বাঁকুড়া, সিউড়ীর মত বড় শহরে চাকরি তো প্রায় পাকা। ঝুনঝুনওয়ালাদেরই তো ওসব জায়গায় কত অফিস, কত ফ্যাক্টরি, রমরমা কারবার!

তার ওপর সমাজে, পাড়া প্রতিবেশী, আত্মীয় বন্ধু মহলে সম্মান বলেও তো একটা ব্যাপার আছে, নাকি? সরস্বতীর অবশ্য কলকাতার নামিদামি কলেজই বেশি পচ্ছন্দ। তবে তার ঝক্কি আর খরচ দুইই বেশি। তা কিনা, এসব ভুলে গিয়ে গুপীকে ঐ ঝড়ঝড়ে ঝেকড্ডেতে পাঠানো আর নিজের হাতে খুন করার মধ্যে তফাৎ তেমন কিছুই নেই।

মাধ্যমিক পাশ করে গোপীনাথের হঠাৎ কলা বিভাগে সাহিত্য আর অর্থনীতি (ইকনমিক্স) নিয়ে পড়তে ইচ্ছা হয়। তা বিজ্ঞান আর কলার দ্বন্দে কলাকে কলা দেখিয়ে তিনকড়ির ডাক্তার-ইজ্ঞিনিয়ার-বৈজ্ঞানিক; আর সরস্বতীর টাটা-ইনফোসিস-IAS-IPS-বিদেশযাত্রার জয়লাভের কাহিনী বিস্তারিতভাবে বর্ণনা না করলেও পাঠকদের তা বুঝতে বেশি বেগ পেতে হবে না বলেই মনে হয়। তার ওপর, যা একগুঁয়ে ছেলে বাবা! বেশি কিছু বললে আবার কিছু করে না বসে। তা বিদেশ যাত্রার ব্যাপারটা অবশ্য তিনকড়িরও পছন্দ। আজকাল তো ব্যাংকক, দুবাই বা চিন গেলেই এখানকার লোকেদের মাটিতে ঠিক করে পা পড়ে না। আমেরিকা বা পশ্চিম ইউরোপে উচ্চশিক্ষা আর কাজ করা তো এখানে নোবেল পাবার সমান, ভাল ছেলে হবার সর্বসম্মত ISI বা ISO 9004 মানদন্ড। তখন গর্বে বুক ফুলে গেলে ২৬ সাইজের গেজ্ঞিটা পাল্টে ৩২ কিনতে হবে অবশ্য।

যাইহোক, অনেক যুদ্ধ বিগ্রহ, অহিংস এবং অসহযোগ আন্দোলনের পর গোপীনাথের গোবিন্দপুরে সরকারি মহাবিদ্যালয়ে বিজ্ঞান শাখায় ভর্তি এবং ওখানকার মহান শিক্ষক, থুরি অধ্যাপকদের, তত্বাবধানে শিক্ষালাভ শুরু হল।

তা গোপীনাথ কলেজ থেকে ফিরে মাকে ওর ফিজিক্সে ফেল করার খবর দেবার পর-

গোপীনাথের মা সরস্বতী:

হ্যাঁরে গুপি, পরীক্ষাটার আগে খেলাটা একটু কম করলেই পারতিস বাবা। তোর বাবা কত করে তোকে বলল। একটু ওর কথাটা শুনলে আজ এ দিন আসত না। তুই কিনা ফেল করলি? তাও আবার ফিজিক্সে! তোর বাবা অনেক চেষ্টা করছে তোর মাস্টারকে বুঝিয়ে সুঝিয়ে রাজি করিয়ে তোকে আর একটা সুযোগ দিতে। তার জন্য অনেক টাকা খরচ হবে বলছিল। আর ঐ রকম করিস না। বুঝিসইত আমাদের বয়স হচ্ছে। তুই না দেখলে কে আমাদের বুড়ো বয়সে দেখবে?

পাশের বাড়ীর সুনুকে দেখ। বাড়ীতে যতক্ষন থাকে সারাদিন পড়াশুনো করে। তার মধ্যেই কুমোনো না কামানো কি বলে, সেটা; তারপর তাইকোন্ড না লন্ডভন্ড সেটা, তারপর সাঁতার, তারপর গিটার আর গান। বাড়ীর কোন কাজে সাহাজ্য না করে, বা, এদিক ওদিক হাঁ করে তাকিয়ে, ডাংগুলি খেলে তোর মত সময় নষ্ট করে না। কি ভাল ছেলে!

আর তুই? সারাদিন টোঁ টোঁ করে ঘুরে বেরান। কখনও কারুর বাড়ীর পাঁচিলে, আবার পরক্ষনেই আম গাছে। কখনও গরুর পেছনে, তো কখনও গাধার পিঠে। জলে মাছ, কাদায় ব্যাঙ, আকাশে পাখি দেখে কোন পড়ুয়া ছেলে ওভাবে সময় নষ্ট করে? পরীক্ষার আগের দিন কোন আক্কেলে তুই নদীতে তিন ঘন্টা সাঁতার কেটে, ঐ বখাটে নীচুপট্টীর ছেলেগুলোর সঙ্গে টোঁ টোঁ করে ঘুরে এলি? তোর বাবার রাগ হওয়া কি খুব অসঙ্গত? তোর জন্য আমাদের কত কথা শুনতে হয় জানিস? শুধু কি পাড়ার লোক? আত্মীয়, বন্ধুবান্ধব সবার কাছ থেকে তোর সম্বন্ধে শুনতে হয়। ঐ নীচুপট্টীর ছেলেওগুলোর সঙ্গে না মিশে সুনুর মত ছেলেদের সঙ্গে মিশলে তোর কত ভাল হবে সেটা বোঝার বয়স তোর যথেষ্ঠ হয়েছে। মাঝেমাঝে মনে হয় ভগবান তুমি আমাদের কপালেই এই সৃষ্টিছাড়া, দুরন্ত জেদি ছেলে দিলে!

অনেক হয়েছে। এবার কিছু খেয়ে দয়া করে পড়তে বসো- বাবা আসার আগে। আর কতদিক সামলাব? এবার পাগল হয়ে যাব।

এর কিছুদিন পর কলেজে, অধ্যাপক বিমান রায়চৌধুরি:

তোমার বাবা কত মানীগুণী লোক। অত করে বললেন তাই কথাটা ফেলতে পারলাম না। তোমার মত অমনযোগী, কথা না শুনতে চাওয়া ছেলেদের আমি এক্কেবারেই দু চোখে দেখতে পারি না। ঐ উত্তরটা তুমি কোন আক্কেলে লিখলে? আমি কি তোমাদের ক্লাসের নোটে ওটা বলেছিলাম? যত্তসব!

তোমার বয়সে আমরা ওসব ঘুড়ি উড়িয়ে বা ফুটবল খেলে সময় নষ্ট করি নি। এই যে আজ এসব সম্মান, প্রভাব প্রতিপত্তি দেখছ তা তিলতিল করে, বিদ্যে বুদ্ধি দিয়ে, খেটে মেহনত করে তৈরী করতে হয়েছে। আমি তখন দিনে কুড়ি ঘন্টা করে পড়তাম। বড়রা যা বলতেন সব মন দিয়ে শুনতাম। কখনও তাদের মুখের ওপর কথা বলা তো দুরের কথা, ভাল করে তাদের চোখের দিকেও তাকাতাম না। সেদিন তোমার এক বন্ধুকে- গাধা বুড়ো হলে ঘোড়া হয় না, সম্মান নিতে জানতে হয়- টাইপের কি সব কথা বলছিলে মনে হল?

যাইহোক, কাজের কথায় আসি। তখনকার দিনেই আমার সব সাবজেক্টে দুটো করে প্রাইভেট টিউসন। তার সঙ্গে কেজরিওয়াল কোচিং। তোমাদের ঐ ঝুনঝুনওয়ালা কোচিং ওর কাছে নস্যি। তোমার তো আবার তাও নেই।

তোমার প্রতিবেশি সুনু না? ও তো আমর কাছে প্রাইভেট টিউসন নেয়। ওর থেকে শিখতে পার। কখনও মুখের ওপর কথা বলে না। যা সাজেসন আর নোট দিই সেটাই অসাধারণ মুখস্থ করে পরীক্ষায় ওর নম্বর দেখেছ? বাংলা, ইংরেজি, ভূগোল, ইতিহাস তো ছেড়ে দাও; অঙ্ক বিজ্ঞানেও মুখস্থর কোনও বিকল্প নেই। স্টার তো এখন পাস মার্ক। তুমি কি ভাবছ জয়েন্টে তুমি প্রশ্ন দেখার পর চিন্তা করে, ভেবে উত্তর দেবে? আবার, উত্তর শুধু ঠিক হলেই হবে না। তোমাকে জানতে হবে পরীক্ষকের কোন উত্তরটা চাই। তখন কেউ তোমাকে ডেকে জিজ্ঞেস করবে না তুমি কি ভাব, কেন তা ভাব। তোমার মতে চললে একশতে তিরিশও পেতে হবে না। তাতে আড়াই হাজার ranking আর পুরুলিয়া ইজিনিয়ারিং কলেজ পেতে পার। ওতে দিল্লি, মুম্বই, খড়্গপুর, বা নিদেনপক্ষে আমাদের যাদবপুর, শিবপুর পাবে ভেবেছ?

যা হোক্, তোমার বাবার দিকে তাকিয়ে এবারের মত তোমাকে দ্বিতীয়বার সুযোগ দিচ্ছি। আমি কমরেড, অধ্যাপক পালিতকে বলে দিয়েছি। উনি তোমার মৌখিক পরীক্ষা নেবেন। আমার আর তোমার বাবার মুখ ডুবিয়ো না।

(এখানে বলে রাখা ভাল কলেজের প্রধান, অধ্যাপক পালিতও আর কমরেড নেই। অন্য বুদ্ধিমান লোকেদের মত উনিও কমরেড ছেড়ে, বেশি-রেড হয়ে এখন বিছুটিমূল পার্টির নেতা। তা এত বছরের অভ্যেস, সহজে কি আর যায়?)

আর একটা কথা। পরের সপ্তাহ থেকে আমার কাছে প্রাইভেট টিউসন এ চলে আসবে। রাত সাড়ে দশটা থেকে তোমাদের ব্যাচ শুরু হবে। সপ্তাহে দু দিন। তোমার বাবার সঙ্গে কথা হয়ে গেছে। আমার কথা শুনলে পরের পরীক্ষাগুলোয় নাইন্টি পারসেন্ট কোন ব্যাপার হবে না।

ও বাবা, দেড়টা বেজে গেছে দেখছি! বাড়ী যাই। টিউসনের এই ব্যাচের ছেলেগুলো চলে আসবে।

ওহ্, তোমার সাইকেল আছে দেখছি। একটা কাজ করো তো। তোমাদের পরের পিরিওডটাও হবে না। অধ্যাপক পালিত বাড়ীতে ব্যাস্ত। মেয়ে-জামাই এসেছে আমেরিকা থেকে। তুমি সাইকেলটা নিয়ে তোমাদের পাড়ার মণি স্যাকরার দোকান থেকে আমার গোমেদের আংটিটা নিয়ে আমার বাড়ী পৌঁছে দিয়ে পরের পিরিওডটা করতে পারবে। পরশু ওটা সারতে দিয়ে এসেছি, আজ দেবার কথা। পেমেন্ট করে দেওয়া আছে।

গল্পটা শেষ করার আগে বলি-

প্রথমে বলা ইন্টারনেটে পাওয়া গল্পের ছাত্রটি ছিল নীলস্ বোর। পদার্থবিজ্ঞানে নোবেল পুরষ্কারজয়ী প্রথম ডেনিশ বিজ্ঞানী। নাৎসিদের আদর সহ্য না করতে পেরে উনি দেশ ছেড়ে ব্রিটেনে থাকা শুরু করেছিলেন। পরে দেশে ফিরে আসেন। ওনার ছেলেও ডেনমার্ক থেকেই পদার্থবিজ্ঞানে নোবেল পান- ব্রিটেন বা আমেরিকা থেকে নয়।

গোপীনাথের বাবা, বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের আ্যডমিনিশট্রেশন আর পরীক্ষা বিভাগের বিজ্ঞজনেরা, দ্বিতীয় পরীক্ষা নেবার পর অধ্যাপক পালিতের প্রতিক্রিয়া, সমাজের বিদ্দজ্জনেরা, পাড়ার সুনুদার মা প্রভৃতির কথা বলার ইচ্ছে ছিল। আরও বেশ কিছু লোকের কথা বলা উচিৎ যারা নিজেদের ছেলেদের উচ্ছন্ন যাওয়া সহ্য করতে পারে, কিন্ত ডাক্তারবাবুর ছেলেকে আম গাছে দেখলে অতীব উদ্বীঘ্ন এবং প্রচন্ড চিন্তিত হয়ে পরতেন। ওদের কথা না হয় পরের বার বলব।

আর গোপীনাথ? যারা ভারতের বা পশ্ছিমবাংলার সমাজ এবং ওখানকার (অ)শিক্ষা ব্যাবস্থা সম্পর্কে জানে তাদের গোপীনাথের ভবিষ্যত বুঝতে খুব একটা বেগ পেতে হবে না।

ঝুনঝুনওয়ালা আর অধ্যাপক রায়চৌধুরিদের কল্যানে ডাক্তার, ইজ্ঞিনিয়ার, বৈজ্ঞানিক এবং আরও অনেক বিদেশে এক্সপোর্টেড এবং দেশে এক্সপোর্ট-কোয়ালিটি প্রতিভার দৌলতে দেশের শতকরা নিরানব্বই শতাংশ গোপীনাথদের অকালে পঞ্চত্তপ্রাপ্তি হয়। যাত্রা দলে পাঁচ টাকার চাকরিও আজকাল ওদের জোটে বলে মনে হয় না। নীলস বোর-রা আজকাল তাই বোর হয়ে নাকি সবাই পশ্চিমেই জন্মায়।

আর আমরা? হাতে পেনসিল নিয়ে ভাবি ওটা কোথায় ঢোকাব। বুদ্ধিজীবিরা ন্যাকামো, আঁতেলরা আঁতেলামো, আর আমরা, আম-জনতা, এক হাতে পেনসিল আর অন্য হাতে অন্যের ফেলে দেওয়া আমের আঁটি নিয়ে বর্তমানের দেওলিয়াপনা প্রকটভাবে উদযাপন করে কি আনন্দই না পাই! অতীতের সব বোর-দের নিয়ে, তাদের জন্মদিন পালনের নামে মাতলামো করার সুযোগ খুঁজি। গোপীনাথরা আমাদের সামনে মাঝেমাঝে হঠাৎ হঠাৎ উদয় হয়। মনে হয় যেন আমাদের চোখের সামনে আয়নাটা তুলে ধরে হাসছে।

না, গোপীনাথও নীলস বোর হয় নি। সব কি অবাস্তব হিন্দি সিনেমা “তিনঠো বুরবক্”? ভুল দেশে, ভুল সময়ে জন্মানর খেসারত দিতে সে, লেহ্ বা লাদাখে নয়, নিশ্চীন্দপুরের গোপীনাথই থেকে গেছিল। স্থানীয় মাড়োয়াড়ীদের ধানকলে হিসেবের খাতা লিখে আর জেলুসিল খেয়ে, নিজের আর কিছু ক্রমশ অবলুপ্ত হতে বসা সরল, পূর্ণ স্বাক্ষর জেলায় অনেক নিরক্ষরের মধ্যে কিছু গরীব গুর্ব চাষাভূষোর ছেলেমেয়েকে অঙ্ক বিজ্ঞান ছাড়াও ‘মানুষ’ হবার সেই ভয়ঙ্কর স্বপ্ন দেখাত।

না, গোপীনাথরা আজকাল আর বোর হয় না।

বি.দ্র: সব চরিত্র এবং দুঃশ্চরিত্রগুলো কাল্পনিক হলেও ঘটনাগুলোকে কাল্পনিক বলে উড়িয়ে দেওয়া বোধহয় ঠিক হবে না। আপনারা বিচক্ষন, বুদ্ধিমান। আশা করি ন্যায় বিচারই করবেন।

বিধিবদ্ধ সতর্কীকরণ: এই গল্পটা লেখার জন্য দেশে বা বিদেশে থাকা কোন ডাক্তার, ইঞ্জিনিয়ার, বৈজ্ঞানিক, আইটি-ওয়ালা, প্রফেসর প্রভৃতিকে কোন ভাবে আঘাত করা হয় নি।

Short URL: http://goo.gl/ODRLYE

Who does an MBA benefit to- other than the university offering it, of course?

2015-05-15T18:00:00.000-04:00

It’s almost impossible to ignore attractive advertisements of MBA courses offered by different universities on TV and other media, job advertisements needing people with MBA degrees to occupy positions related to management and leadership. It provokes people to think if a degree like MBA would make people more entrepreneurial, better managers or worthy leaders. Are organizations recruiting and/or promoting such people more successful?

The concept of business management and business school is a relatively new development. The first business school was founded in Paris, France in 1819 while the first university in the world was established, arguably, in India, Nalanda university, around 427 AD (but subsequently destroyed around 1200 AD), while the University of Bologna, Italy was established in 1088 and continuing ever since. The first business school in the USA is Harvard Business School, established in 1908. It was also the first business school to offer MBA degree. Previously neither MBA nor other management degree or third party certificates (e.g. PMP, Six Sigma Lean etc.) was so important or financially remunerative in corporate America.

Current widely prevalent culture of MBA and business management in terms of manufacturing and corporate management arrived in the USA during 1970s, instigated by the Japanese companies. It would not be wrong to say that the concept of operational management and constant pursuit of excellence came from Japan or successful Japanese companies like Toyota and National-Panasonic (Matsushita Electric Corp.). Massive success of Japanese companies in western markets provoked or forced American/western companies to initiate or learn Japanese management style. Previously it was assumed that success of such Japanese companies is basically cultural. It started changing around 1974 when Matsushita purchased an ailing American TV manufacturing unit near Chicago from Motorola, retained almost all its previous staff while making the same unit massively successful.

Many big and famous Japanese companies like Toyota maintain its own training programs and institutes to train its employees, mainly the executives, and grooming future leaders. Few American companies like GE also had similar training centers. But there is a very fundamental difference. The motive of such Japanese training institutes are not making money by offering that training or degree or certificates to anyone who can pay, in stark contrast to its American counterparts. Such Japanese training institutes within a company are highly guarded venture. Admission of others, even for short visit, are not much encouraged, if not prohibited.

It might be surprising to many that top ranking Japanese Universities, former Imperial universities, formed prior to World War-I, later became seven best universities did/do not offer any course in management. Only one of such universities, University of Tokyo, started offering management courses as late as 2008. Few other Japanese universities, mostly private, do have business schools and offer MBA degree. But study of business or management is not so visible or even important in corporate Japan that practically dominates many sectors of global economy since World War II.

It seems that social mobility and consolidation of wealth is worsening almost globally. America is among the worst affected, at least among developed countries. It perfectly correlates with eroding scientific and technological edge and competitiveness of American industries. USA ranks sixteenth in terms of "quality of research" in 2012, down from its second raking in 1995. Fast declining competitiveness of advanced industries in the USA is almost a routine issue discussed in media and policy makers alike.

Nowadays we hear a lot about developing leadership and innovation. We probably would hear more about those seemingly un-trainable attributes as social mobility and wealth consolidation deteriorate. Organizations have to manage with fewer talents and leaders while the demand for such people is expected to increase due to growing markets in many countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Moreover, we are now hearing an increasing noise about talent shortage in almost every sector. Some industries seem to be in more difficult position than others. And it’s not restricted to just USA. Many Human Resource (HR) professionals do not agree with talent shortage ‘propaganda’. They believe that there is no shortage of qualified manpower. What the companies are complaining is about the price they like to pay for talented employees. Such tendency, even by the companies making good profit, will create more bottlenecks to recruit and retain employees with leadership and innovation capabilities. People investing good amount of money in getting or buying MBA degrees need to recover that expanses, irrespective of its value. Reluctance of companies to pay more is bound to put pressure on both the recruiter and the candidate. That burden will also be passed to other non-MBA employees or job seekers as well.

Many, if not most, of the MBA candidates are already employed. Company's current higher management (again, mostly, MBA alumni) attach a great value to that degree. Many, if not most, pursue the degree to get promoted in the company they are already working for or to get a new job elsewhere. It would be interesting to analyze the job performance, not salary though, before and after such people get MBA, to know if MBA actually add value to an employee and, most importantly, to the company. If the answer is affirmative, then the next obvious question would be- at what price- for the company. If an organization gets $100 benefit but needs to pay extra $1000 per month, then it does not make much sense. Unfortunately, sufficient data of such confidential nature from neutral source is not so easy to come by.

But available data do indicate that most top performing American companies starting from older generation of successful companies, which are no less important even today, like Ford, Boeing, General Electric, General Motors, Pfizer, Monsanto and many more; to today’s successful tech giants like Microsoft, Google, Apple, even Spacex, were established by leaders and entrepreneurs without an MBA. The long list of such companies also indicate that profile of such companies fit almost all types of industries. MBA does not seem to help much to ambitious entrepreneurs- earlier or now. It’s becoming clearer that companies created by technocrats and/or scientists generally are more sustainable, productive and successful in creating wealth in the long run.

It does not take much to understand that whatever way you divide $1000 among some people; it still remains $1000. More you manage for yourself (and certain people), less others would get. The pie would increase only if the total value increases. Here I should mention that sharing of profit arising from improved technological or managerial practice, in fact, declined in the US in last few decades, unlike past corporate history of Henry Ford era. He doubled average workers’ wage, shortening the workday from nine hours to eight, along with few more job benefits. And he did all those without any compulsion from law or labor union. He revolutionized not only global automobile industry but also helped building legendary American middle class and America as a super power.

It’s now a well-accepted fact that talented students do not favor science and technology as a career, almost everywhere, even in developing countries. Creative art and humanities are doing even worse. As a society, we seem to be more obsessed with wealth management than wealth creation. Our economy and businesses are now overwhelmingly dominated by one aspect- finance. About 60 percent of the graduates from top three Ivy League universities (Harvard, Yale and Princeton) opt for careers in finance and management and not in science and technology. Talented students from prestigious universities still flock to Wall Street. This craze for wealth management among talented students in almost every developed country is also destroying able human resource needed for wealth creation, and cater to other faculties of human mind and creativity. Fortunately, the trend seems to be reversing. Since last couple of years, a growing number of ivy league business school graduates are joining Silicon Valley tech sector, leaving the glamour of Wall Street. But, it's too early to conclude if it's more permanent in nature or if it's again, due to lure of more money and/or power, and not for the joy of creativity and helping the society through science and technology.

It has been proved many times that neither leadership nor the ability to innovate can be taught or learned much in formal education. A decently accepted model postulates that only 10 percent comes from formal education while 70 percent comes from on-the-job experience to develop leadership. Actual leaders and geniuses rely more on heuristic. But that capability can come only if one has mastered the boolean, i.e. sense of logic supported by data or fact. Once one master the art of boolean, then only s/he can practice heuristics successfully and go beyond direct experimental proof or evidence based hypothesis or conclusion. There are many examples of such heuristics geniuses in human history, starting from Fermat’s last theorem to Einstein’s famous formula E=MC². In all such cases, experimental proof came much later, if at all. Nonetheless, great sense of logic (boolean) and/or scientific or technical ability alone is not and must not be the main parameter for a great leader. To me, management seems to be a common sense approach based on sense of heuristics and, more importantly, personal integrity and innate ambition where social, personal values and ethics play a huge role.

Behavioral economists suggest that predictable or rationally irrational decisions are far more common among top executives than we might think. The last global financial meltdown around 2008 is an example, may be little extreme, for neglecting such human ‘misbehavior’. And it’s very much possible that many such top executives who were part of the global financial meltdown were motivated more by the social upbringing, personal values and ethics, or lack of it, that I mentioned earlier.

Many people would agree that the most challenging management job would be to become the President or Prime Minister of a democratic country. But no country has any requirement for its top executive to have any such degree like MBA. Neither people with long corporate career with prestigious management degrees and/or experience are proven to be a better national manager or leader.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/xvv6X5

India should reform the way top bureaucrats are recruited and function

2015-03-23T09:34:00.003-04:00

For quite sometime I was thinking that it's high time to consider reforming Indian civil service, viz. IAS (Indian Administrative Service), IPS (Indian Police Service), IFS (Indian Foreign Service) type 'elite' services. Such public service was introduced by the British rulers, mainly for tax collection purposes. That's why these people are still called collector. India should reform its top bureaucracy and the way it's recruited and function.

If any ministry or department or agency need any officer, they can directly advertise, mention what qualifications/experience etc. they need and select the most suitable candidate. It's how civil servants and bureaucrats are recruited in USA, Canada, UK and most, if not all, other developed democracies. The British themselves never had the same system, which they introduced in its colonies like India.

That's one of the main reasons for rampant corruption and lack of governance in India since long. Indian civil servants are utter misuse and wastage of few genuine talents who join through one of the most competitive exams in the world with less than 0.3% success rate via UPSC (Union Public Service Commission). It has been proved time and time again that, "Indian bureaucracy is the worst in Asia" and also among the least effective in the whole world.

Such, basically, clerical job whose main purpose is to implement whatever is told (read, ordered) to them by their political masters. Previously it was the British rulers and now (mostly) the criminal and/or corrupt Indian politicians. Subservience to politicians and feudal governance hardly attract any candidate with awareness who has natural leadership, dignity and personal integrity. It's not so surprising that mostly students from relatively lawless states and areas, where they experience and expect huge extra-constitutional power of such public servants, their ability to get huge bribe (and dowry), are attracted to such jobs.

Rare few who join the service with a passion to serve the country with basic sense of justice and ethics, are either 'tamed' or leave the service sooner. Few continue with high level of frustration and just wait for retirement.

Such recruitment of top bureaucrats from outside the lower grade employees are also a major reason for low efficiency and rampant corruption in Indian civil service. It's more dangerous for law enforcement and security agencies. In most, if not all, developed western democracies, higher officials in any law enforcement agency (and many other civil service agencies) are only promoted from lowest positions- unlike that in India. No IPS type recruitment to fill vacancies in top positions in police or other security and investigative agencies in UK or USA. That's a big reason for its neutrality and efficiency.

A feudal society which is so obsessed with socio-economic hierarchy that include power without much accountability, and show off of (mostly) ill gotten wealth is bound to have such infatuation. Even abroad, many, if not most, people from Indian subcontinent are insanely obsessed with "too busy" culture and other socio-economic hierarchy irrespective of their ability and professional satisfaction in 'prestigious' positions like manager, group leader, C suite executive, professor etc. The typical “Sirji” (or its 'hindu equivalent'- Guruji, Sri Sri) culture, the tendency to show-off relationship with influential people, teenage obsession of showing pictures with famous people are so visible among many adults. It’s just another symptom of the same disease, if I may say so.

I think it's high time to reform Indian civil service and introduce some civility into it.

Shorty URL- http://goo.gl/UYPF73

Why our grandchildren are less likely to be part of any Bengali or Indian association abroad- unlike many of our non-Indian colleagues and neighbors?

2014-09-28T12:08:00.003-04:00

Sometime ago I got emails from few local Bengali associations that it need articles for its magazines for upcoming Durga Puja, the greatest event celebrated by almost any cultural organization that has any relation to Bengal or Bengalis- in India and abroad. We all seem to love such events that promote our culture. It includes Bengali’s favorite, mostly sterile adda (that reminds me of Utpal Dutta in Satyajit Ray's 'Aguntak') and food. It provides us the opportunity to skip boring cooking at home for a day or two. This seemingly religious festival is also a great respite even for the atheists.

I visited and lived in few different countries. Witnessed such programs almost everywhere, without much difference- both its unity and diversity (read, division). Initially, it was rather surprising to notice that hardly any Bengali teenagers and young adults attend such Bengali festivals, become part of such Bengali/Indian associations. Young children join such programs till they are under parental control who have no option but to accompany the parents. I do not see almost any second and subsequent generation of Indian/Bengali origin adults there. The picture was and still is not much different for Indian organizations representing different state/region/language/religion from India. Even professional organizations representing India are no different.

Let's change the gear and get some data before coming back to the topic. About 69% of Indian Americans age 25 and over have four-year college degrees, which dwarfs the rates of 51% and 30% achieved by East Asians and whites, respectively. In 2007, the median income of households headed by an Indian American was approximately $83,000, compared with $61,000 for East Asians and $55,000 for whites (1). But these impressive achievements do not reflect social contribution of Indians. It fail to promote positive side of Indian culture (not the moral bankruptcy, lack of any sense of justice, feudal mentality, social hierarchy and pathetic work ethics) that benefit Indian interest, not just for few ‘elites’ or specific political agenda, in India and abroad. We can ignore politically correct, motivational speeches by political and corporate leaders of America.

Many parents feel an overwhelming urge to teach their children the value of ‘our’ culture- mostly in the name of religion and tradition- like Durga Puja. But the question arises, what and how much does such effort achieve? Why so many second generation Indians still face severe identity crisis of being ‘Bengali’ or ‘Indian’ origin, despite the fact that Indians are the most or second most prosperous racial group in western world, including both USA and UK (2)? How does that economic prosperity benefit our future generations- both in India and in the host country?

The answers for most such questions are far from satisfactory. Unlike British or German or Irish or Afro-American groups, I have not seen many third or 5^th generation of Indian origin people with foreign citizenship organizing or proudly celebrating Indian festivals outside India- be it traditional, cultural or religious one. Second and subsequent generations of Bengalis (and, Indians) rather learn and perform ballet or salsa than Bharat Natyam or Kathakali; proudly play piano or violin than tabla or dhol or santur, if not coerced by over-indulging parents.

Are those musical instruments or classical dance styles from India less artistic or ‘cultured’ that our own kids feel less or no attraction to? Or is that peer-pressure from non-Indian friends in a foreign society? Do these children, and more importantly their parents, understand that if they cannot respect their own heritage there is less chance that they can respect other culture?

It’s not that hard to differentiate crude appeasement and opportunistic attitude from genuine appreciation. Generally, a free and productive society and its leaders do not like cronies even if s/he possesses great technical skill or money. They may need, even prefer, these backboneless cronies to perform certain jobs for the company but do not like to give much social acceptance and recognition, not much ready to consider them as their own. Unfortunately, few rare exceptions from India are also considered the same way, with the same default standard, at least initially. Social profiling is a very innate and seemingly effective skill that we learn from our childhood, not only from the parents and society. It's also a potent policy tool, widely used by many corporate and government agencies, mainly immigration and security agencies.

Even the most docile, good-for-nothing fellow (other than being among the most obedient employees) who had no problem to take dowry and marry a highly docile, typical Indian bride from India, hardly attend and get associated with such Indian associations. To cut the long story short- such evidences indicate how we, collectively, fail to offer the advantage to ourselves and, most importantly, to our children and grandchildren the benefit of being part of one of the most glorious heritage and being among the most prosperous racial groups in western world where they get the opportunity and freedom to experience and embrace different other options and ways of life.

We also need to keep in mind that quality of American higher education, research and technological edge, where most Indians are associated with, are steadily declining since last few decades. As per latest data, the overall global ranking of USA slipped to 16^th in 2012 as compared to 2^nd in 1995, when systemic data collection started, so far quality of higher education and research is concerned. It nicely correlate with America's declining economic prosperity and global socio-political dominance. It may or may not be related to demographic change where traditional minorities are becoming majority and percentage of white Caucasian population is declining.

Generally speaking, any immigrant population tends to be more successful. Indian and Bengali population outside India or Bengal (Bangladesh included), respectively, are no different. But that competitive advantage seems to be leveled off by third generation. That is true for any immigrant Bangladeshi or Bengali family settled in either Chittaranjan Park in Delhi or Chicago or Madison in the USA. Financial prosperity of current generation cannot be any indicator of success for subsequent generations, although (unfortunately) parental income does play a major role in future success of children in the USA too, as latest data indicate. But that is an indication of a bigger social problem that USA must address even to maintain its current lower standard of living, economic prosperity and, most importantly, social harmony.

Alienation of subsequent generation of Indians from actual Indian culture or having a wrong impression and/or interpretation about it also give rise to another long term issue when they get involved in India specific projects undertaken by (foreign) governments or private organizations- by virtue of their Indian origin. People who hardly know India and its people can never serve justice to any project intended to benefit Indian society and the host country/company that genuinely likes to achieve positive impact. It’s equally true for those first generation Indians whose knowledge about India hardly goes beyond metro cities and privileged societies there. Watching 'Pather Panchali' or rote memorization of Rabindra Nath Tagore is of no use there.

We fail, first, to realize and then to acknowledge that such Indian/Bengali organizations represent ‘our’ culture to our children. We ourselves and then these organizations are the role models to them. Most of us still promote the same moral bankruptcy, feudal mentality that include sycophancy, racial intolerance (India being the worst among 70 odd countries surveyed), and hierarchical society that we experienced and/or tolerated in India.

Even a felon (criminal) prosecuted and convicted for 'domestic violence', who used beat his wife on a regular basis, was occupying 'board of trustee' position in a Bengali cultural and few other Indian associations, including a religious one, in a city in the USA, where I once lived. Almost everyone in the association and, most importantly, the management knew about it. Few meekly opposed that criminal, that too mostly in private conversations, while many so-called 'highly educated' people like professors, doctors, engineers, 'scientists' actively supported and/or helped him to remain in high positions in such Indian/Bengali/Hindu associations. Abusive behavior, domestic violence against women and children (including girl child killing) seems to be more socially accepted. Such incidences are not so rare among 'educated' and financially prosperous NRIs and Indian origin people abroad as many might think. Personal interaction with many from Indian subcontinent in the US and Europe made that perception stronger.

There is less chance that any second (and subsequent) generation of Indian origin person would feel proud being part of any such association when they compare that culture and ways of running such organizations with other similar ones from European origin people or representing different community. We tend to promote those kids and people who have influence (monetary or otherwise) than real talents. Bigger the city and organization, worse the problem. ‘Indian’ organizations in Columbus (OH), Chicago or Washington or Zurich have far worse problem than smaller places like Madison (WI). And it’s not a scaling up issue. The tendency to brew discontent and break up increases, 1) when it has more affluent, influential members with feudal mentality (who think that giving hefty donations entitles him/her to control the organization, micromanage its agenda to promote self, spouses and children depriving many better deserving candidates- both at organization level, culturally and professionally) and, 2) a steady flow of young first generation immigrants who want to get social acceptance and recognition in a foreign country. No wonder, most big cities in the US have more than one such Indian organizations representing same or similar objectives and/or community.

How wrongly we portray Bengal/India in the eyes of our own children and grandchildren. Surely it has its consequences affecting us, as well as India and the host countries. Promoting actual Indian or Bengali culture after filtering out the issues for which we all are now in a foreign country and not in our own, would help our own children to prosper here in the host country, become more socially productive and successful part of the world (that includes both India and the USA)- than naively refuting or hiding their own origin, suffering from identity crisis and foolishly rejecting one of the oldest and best civilizations and culture the world has ever witnessed.

I hope our children or grandchildren would not be forced to become immigrant and migrate to other greener pastures in case America’s prosperity declines due to our (collective) ignorance or inability– just like our forefathers in India. It would be a great day to witness Indian or Bengali events/festivals spontaneously participated by 4^th generation Indians/Bengalis living here in the USA, as we see for communities like Irish, German and many others. I would feel much happier if I can spontaneously share Bengali literature, culture and traditions without any false pretension or shame with my grandchildren and his/her non-Indian/Bengali spouse. Local Bengali organizations can play a much better, not necessarily bigger, role to help proud Indians/Bengalis like me achieving that- may be with their non-Bengali spouses.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/oOjzes

Modified version of this blog were published in Durga Puja magazine, organized by Bengali Association of Madison (BAM).

The Arab Spring and Nation Building

2013-07-09T12:54:00.002-04:00

Many people and policy makers from western countries were so happy witnessing the rise of democracy in few Arab countries just a couple of years ago. It all started with Tunisia on 18th December 2010. Then spread to countries like Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, and Syria. Many other countries in the region were affected witnessing major protests against its governments. People in some of the Arab countries threw the dictators and installed democratically elected governments. Many of the dictators were propped up by western powers, mainly USA. They were replaced by conservative, if not fundamentalist, organizations like Muslim Brotherhood. Yet the current American president Obama welcomed the uprising. Described it as 'moment of opportunity' on May 2011. For the first time in many years, probably ever, people in these countries elected its own governments. Many people in some poorly governed democracies like India started dreaming for such Arab spring style uprising. So far so good.

Now comes the challenging part. Current political situation in Tunisia, the most western influenced poster child of Arab spring, is 'poisonous' dominated by Islamic extremists led by the salafists. Situation in other countries are equally challenging and similar in nature, not identical though. Recently we are hearing more about Egypt, its recent coup that uprooted democratically elected Morsi government. It seems to be heading towards more trouble. Many western governments have no clue whether to support or oppose it. Previously the american president took no time to come out openly to support the revolution against Mubarak regime, despite the fact that Mubarak government was one of the strongest supporters of US foreign policy in the region. But now Obama is keeping mum, probably confused. American administration probably will continue its financial assistance even after the ‘coup’. Many influential American politicians like John McCain are equally confused whether america should do the ‘right thing’ by suspending aids.

Arab spring reminded us, once again, that revolution is only the first act of a big drama. Subsequent acts are more challenging and require long term sustained preparation. We can get a clue if we analyze more successful transition towards peace, prosperity and democracy in many east european countries. Alternative elite group of people were active in those countries during communism and soviet dominance. Many political leaders, bureaucrats and other professionals started working towards civil society during communist rule. Former Czechoslovakian president, author and poet Vaclav Havel started his work organizing people around 1970s. This trend is not limited to Czech republic but a consistent pattern in other east european countries as well. Such socio-political elites presented a qualified and, most importantly, acceptable alternative. People with shared vision of nation building and professional ability filled the vacuum after collapse of communist rule. It was not the same for Soviet Union and some of its breakaway republics. Reformists and oppositions were either too fragmented or repressed and harassed. Former wolves just changed its skin to become social democrat and came to power. They continued almost same policies of previous regime. No wonder Russia is now branded as a 'mafia state', as per Wikileaks revelation of US diplomatic cables.

It’s not economic or political system but human resource that makes the difference. It seems to be the main challenge with Arab spring too. Most Arab countries never had any such alternative elite group of leaders. Professionals working for past regimes were either killed or totally rejected. Political process and leaders who could lead were simply not there or disenfranchised. Now it have to start from the scratch. It will take a long time if get the right direction and the direction has to come from within.

We see the same trend in both Asia and Africa that were affected by european colonialism and apartheid. Countries that drove away almost all from past regimes suffer more. Almost every former european colony suffered when all white people fled rather than assimilated with native population. Zimbabwe is an extreme while India is a more moderate example compared to former european colonies in Latin America and post-apartheid South Africa. Assimilating socio-political elites, irrespective of past affiliation or racial identity, with shared value and decent sense of professional ethics seems to be a better route. It takes time and sustained effort preparing ground for a beautiful spring that people would enjoy and be proud of. It's tough but surely not impossible.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/r5nFdm

Equality, morality and quality among kids and beyond

2013-01-09T19:12:00.000-05:00

Few days ago I was flipping the January 2013 issue of Smithsonian magazine. There I got this exciting article- Are babies born good? New research offers surprising answers to the age-old question of where morality comes from. Yes, babies are born with basic morality and ability to differentiate between 'right' and 'wrong'.

It reminded me of a discussion on whether to be strict to our kids to make them more quality conscious or follow the current tradition of encouraging our kids for whatever they do. Now majority parents in countries like the US encourage their kids even for a very sloppy job and say awesome. Does that “awesome culture” increase the chance of future success by boosting confidence or encourage kids to continue sloppy work that need to be criticized to encourage him/her to do better or help him/her to try something else? Of course, I do not buy the extreme of “tiger mother” concept prescribed by Prof Amy Chua in her controversial book “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother”. In fact, Prof Chua’s portrayal of typical Chinese mother is becoming less common among Chinese mothers these days. More compelling evidence of why Prof Chua may not be right comes from the fact that countries like India and China where such 'tiger mom' culture is perceived to be more prevalent, do not do well to promote leadership, original thinking and minimize high level of corruption in public lives. Both the countries rank at the very bottom so far creativity and innovation are concerned. The more intriguing question for me is- what should be the right proportion of criticism and encouragement.

I do acknowledge the power of praise and encouragement to make our kids more confident. But we often forget that our praise need to be sincere and with reason. We just cannot keep on saying 'awesome', 'great' in a casual fashion without showing much interest or have time to evaluate what the kid has done. If a kid is intelligent enough to understand 'right' and 'wrong' from a very early age, s/he probably understands what a genuine praise is and what is just a habit. Nonetheless they are confused to evaluate their work and take the easy way of congratulating themselves for even a sloppy job.

Now coming to a trickier issue. D oes confidence really breeds success? Evidently mere high confidence does not breed success. But our effort to make our kids more confident resulted in "narcissism epidemic", at least in USA. Few recent studies concluded that narcissistic attitude among US students are increasing since 1979. Many factors are blamed for that trend, including "parenting styles, celebrity culture, social media and access to easy credit, which allows people to appear more successful than they are". It has been concluded that "there is very little evidence that raising self-esteem leads to tangible, positive outcomes."

Few probable consequences are- increasing dominance of mediocrity in almost every field of life, consolidation of wealth and power in fewer hands with decreasing social mobility. Published data show that rate of innovation and invention is slowing. Nobel Prize winning US economist Joseph Stiglitz recently said, "The US has one of the worst opportunity rates of any of the advanced economies. A child's life chances are more dependent on the income of his or her parents than most other industrial economies".

Now success depends more on networking, ability to agree with majority than raw talent and ability to solve problems. One can gauge this trend more clearly in social networking sites like Facebook. Number of ‘like’ depend more on who is posting it, rather than its relevance or quality. It can also be argued that many people who have less knowledge and/or critical thinking tend to give 'expert' opinions. Such opinions are readily available to others by virtue of media and internet. Higher acceptance or 'agreeability' can give rise to a sense of confidence and seemingly more influence among peers with long term consequences in democratic societies. The same media, internet and social networking sites also make common people aware that some of our leaders, famous public figures, top executives are no genius. Sycophancy, nepotism, stealing ideas, telling lies are not taboos anymore but a ‘desired’ character for increasing number of people to become successful. People who succeeded via that route are less likely to accept constructive criticism or failure. That puts extra pressure among colleagues, junior staff and students. The trend is expanding due to increasing reach of news-hungry media and internet. More we know about our ‘leaders’ more we tend to think that s/he is just one of us, nothing special. If others consider that person a genius, then I’m no less a genius! Recently I watched a news report on famous american president, John F Kennedy (JFK). It included some of his affairs, mainly with a former white house intern Mimi Alford. Few people who were previously fond of JFK started 'severely disliking' him after they came to know JFK more intimately. Such reversal of fortune, erosion of public faith will continue to rise as internet and other media coverage increases its reach and investigative ability.

It’s yet to be proved if increasing reach of internet and other media add or counter-balance its power to promote mediocrity in the name of talent in this era of reality shows. But we can be reasonably assured that increased scrutiny would help to promote transparency. Evidences now indicate that social media is making us more honest.Now many well groomed people, ambitious enough to succeed and occupy influential positions would try avoiding such media scrutiny and taking extra precaution to leave less digital footprint.

Some of our great leaders like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln did not have formal education. But lately most US presidents are coming from privileged background with Ivy League university degrees while past US presidents were from all over the country and from different colleges and universities. Of course, I’m not talking about Obama. I consider him as a rare exception in this regard. The trend deteriorated further after Ronald Reagan, who practically transformed US education mainly higher education, to another for-profit industry. It does not seem to be a mere coincidence that all the US presidents are from Yale or Harvard since 1980s. One can observe the same trend for many influential positions in US, including supreme court judges. All nine current supreme court judges in US are from either Harvard or Yale, except one (justice Alito).

It's not so surprising that quality of education, which is considered the silver bullet for social mobility and fulfilling the so-called ‘American dream’, is deteriorating. Education is becoming more of manufacturing workers and consumers than to groom a complete human being with the ability to understand the difference between ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ to act accordingly. Now money and influence plays a more important role in deciding college admission (1, 2). Such students enjoy even more competitive edge in admission in very selective and costly Ivy League universities where many of our current leaders in both corporate and government sector now comes from. The famous book, "The Price of Admission" by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Daniel Golden shows, "how America’s ruling class buys its way into elite colleges and universities – and who gets left outside the gates".

Einstein once said, “everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid”. It’s not that hard to understand the consequences of encouraging a fish to think that it is equally talented to climb a tree. The situation gets worse if climbing tree is far more financially rewarding than swimming. In that situation, many parents will try to coerce their fish-kids to climb. The culture of imposed equality may not be that great to infuse a sense of quality and mentor talent. Deliberate or not, it seems to help kids from privileged background who are destined to be 'successful' irrespective of their ability and talent at the cost of the society and the nation in the long run. I'm not sure though if infatuation to wealth management and not wealth creation by talented or ambitious students since last few decades is related to it.

We seem to destroy the in-born morality that I told earlier. More people feel less ashamed to accept awards/scholarships/credit that they don't deserve. The tendency probably continues when such kids grow up and occupy influential positions, be it in academic-research, corporate management or public policy. It probably makes a run-of-the-mill decent worker but not a natural leader who is able to earn respect and lead effectively.

Now we live in an increasingly smaller global village with more aggressive news media, increasing reach of internet and social networking sites. People feel comfortable with mediocrity. Many people don't like to take the pain to find out what they are good at, what they love to do (particularly if that is not financially rewarding) but prefer to impose themselves on a subject that they are not so good at. Best prepared candidates are not always the best or most talented ones to succeed. Gradually talent is replaced by mediocrity. More kids are groomed with that objective. They are less encouraged to excel what they are good at if that does not fit the objective. We see its consequence more clearly during selection of top bureaucrats in India through, arguably, the most competitive selection processes in the world with less than 0.3% success rate. Yet ‘Indian bureaucracy the worst in Asia’.

We can see its influence not only in schools, universities and screening for a specific career but also in many other forums and cultural programs. Many, if not majority, cultural organizations promote children and adults who have proper connections or influence. Such parents feel elated simply by seeing themselves, their spouses and children on the stage. Many times we witness reduction of performance time even for expensive artists from abroad to accommodate such whims of influential members. They seem to be totally ignorant on the larger implications of such act of nepotism. Many organizers of such programs proudly assert that cultivating equality, mass participation is the goal; not promoting talent or leadership. The sense of justice, professional ethics are severely damaged for the kids too. Talented kids are not only demoralized but also start accepting corruption and nepotism as part of life, as the main (sometimes, only) criteria to be recognized and enjoy what they are good at. They too will try to take advantage of the same in areas where they are not so good at.

In a sense, imposition of equality helps maintaining the status-quo. It encourages people who believe in dynasties, give effort to establish their children towards same success and power. We need to keep in mind that kids from privileged families sometimes are under more pressure to succeed. Regular evaluation, defeat in the hands of more talented student help such kids to accept defeat, remain humble and empathetic. It help promoting talent, grooming worthy leaders.

No, I am not suggesting that kids from privileged families cannot be good or genius. Yes, they have equal probability to excel. We need to encourage students who are good- irrespective of his/her background. I believe that every child has talent. We must acknowledge specific talent and not lower the bar to make almost everyone feel like a genius. Students who cannot see the bigger picture start believing that if many mediocre people become so successful then why not they. In the long run, the rot will become clearer in form of deterioration of governance, declining ability to innovate and invent, erosion of product quality (both goods and creative art) resulting deterioration of industrial competitiveness, and overall quality of life. It's impact will be on whole society, including our children. Many of us often forget that we and our own children, who may not be that excellent in a specific area, would have a far more productive and happier life if s/he is under a competent professional and governed by an able leader- academic, corporate or political.

Coming from a developing country, l personally feel little worried witnessing the same trend in a developed country like the USA.

Shorter URL: http://goo.gl/uEF6M

** Modified version of the blog is published in one of the most influential science and technology policy forums in USA, Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes (CSPO) at Arizona State University and Washington DC.

Equality and quality in children and beyond: towards a more productive science and better society

India needs to be cautious while following the American model of higher education and research

2012-10-28T16:06:00.001-04:00

It's almost unanimously accepted that quality of Indian education and research is steadily declining since last few decades despite of huge increase in funding and number of schools, colleges, universities and institutes. It's also well recognized that we need drastic reform. Whenever we talk about reform in Indian science, we generally end up talking about the American model as the gold standard. Many do not consider analysing the US system and its limitations in more detail. Others think that we should first reach the current state of American research and only then talk about further modification, probably following the same US model.

There is no doubt that developing countries like India can learn and more to gain from the American model of higher education and research, e.g. transparency in funding and recruitment. But we also need to be aware of probable pitfalls so that we do not repeat the same mistakes and end up wasting our scarce resources and lose few more generations of scientists.

Since early 18th century when France led the world, till today, history and sociopolitical events indicate that emergence of science super powers generally follow economic uprising. Not the other way round. Scientists must not take undue advantage of a nation’s appetite for heroes. It becomes more important in this era of economic crisis where almost all national governments are hard pressed to fund research projects. Here, I mainly discuss the issue in the context of the US, which we generally try to follow in India.

Lately, the whole assembly line to manufacture "scientist" is becoming dysfunctional as evident by slowing down of innovation and invention. Even the mighty pharmaceutical R&D sector is now suffering from acute shortage of new drugs. Few policy makers in the US already started asking serious questions about the relevance of once highly productive post World War II ‘input–output model’, where monetary input was assumed to be directly proportional to knowledge output, to judge the efficacy of today’s public funded research. Many argue that scientific output should be judged in terms of its capacity to achieve the desired social outcome.

We generally forget that immediately after the World War II, the US had no serious scientific and economic competitor. The US higher education and research enterprise was, and still is, much larger than that of any other country. The most successful and dominant player for American research was the Department of Defense (DoD). With (i) end of cold war and the declining role of DoD in translating public funded R&D into tangible social outcome; (ii) rise of many serious challengers (mainly the emerging economics in East Asia and South America); (iii) newly emerging issues (e.g. public health care, global warming and energy crisis) that require greater scientific understanding, needed a different approach to quantify and prioritize national scientific need. These issues arose mainly during 1980s and put the traditional ‘input–output’ model under serious threat. India never has the luxury of being an economic superpower to invest heavily to build a massive infrastructure on science education and research, naively thinking that quantity will ensure quality. Here I should mention that India already has the second largest higher education system in the world, only after the USA!

Some people already started demanding that the universities should be restricted to teaching, without wasting public money in the name of research. Now US universities are more interested to select those candidates as faculties who have developed suitable network and mastered the art to attract grants, than to identify and select candidates with original thinking ability who can innovate and/or invent to generate revenue for the university. Present model completely absolves the universities from the responsibility of spending tax-payers’ money. In its most optimistic and fair terms, keeping aside the regular allegations of nepotism and corruption in recruitment and funding, Indian research institutes and universities are no different.

The lack of strategic thinking, focus and coordination between government, other funding agencies and universities, and by unrealistic expectations of what money could buy are becoming more evident these days. Some of the problems, including that of the ‘publish or perish’ model started long ago during the 1970s, as indicated in the book, Heraclitean Fire: Sketches from a Life before Nature, by the famous biochemist Erwin Chargaff. Later, it became more of a global problem as initial success of the American ‘input–output’ and ‘publish or perish’ model was adopted by many countries, including India, albeit half-heartedly.

The problem worsened as the most important parameter to quantify productivity and efficacy of our publication based academic research started losing its credibility. The ‘monopolistic’ business of the academic publication industry has become one of the fastest growing lucrative businesses without much self-regulation and government oversight. Today almost anything can be published in journals claiming to be peer-reviewed. It has significantly contributed towards deterioration of the peer-review process, rising incidents of scientific misconducts and higher acceptance of such misconducts among researchers. China is a good example in this regard with increasing incidences of plagiarism and other forms of scientific misconduct. Chinese journals find a whopping 31% of submissions are plagiarized.

It has serious consequences not only on over all scientific environment but also on careers of individual researcher – as recruitment, funding, promotion and fame, which can be defined as ‘institutional power to influence future direction in any specific area’, depends largely on that single parameter. Credibility of data, its interpretation and conclusion seem to depend more on individual researcher. Any researcher adhering to the higher standard of professional ethics and scientific understanding is now under severe threat.

Lack of accountability partly explains low financial remuneration for non-tenured researchers and students, poor working condition, poor mentoring that contributes to low attraction and lower retention of talented students in the US. It reduce support towards science not only among talented students, but also among policy makers and general public for this vital sector, which was, still is and will remain crucial for industrial competitiveness and higher quality of living in western countries. Any country ambitious enough to have a knowledge based economy, as some Indian policy-makers like to achieve, needs to acknowledge that increasing dominance of mediocrity is a serious threat today than ever before.

Companies are running out of new blockbuster drugs, other novel products and technology that can generate high profit to pay its shareholders and executives as the quality and integrity of scientists are steadily going down and mediocrity flourishes. It's one of the major reasons why companies are increasingly taking illegal routes by undertaking deceptive marketing and illegal promotion of drugs not approved by US federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or similar regulatory authorities in other countries. Its impact is also becoming more common in research publications, scientific seminars and conferences. Almost all, if not all, major drug and medical device companies now seem to be involved in systemic and massive fraud (Abbott, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, Novartis, BASF). They are increasingly bribing doctors even in developed countries like USA. Now more than 90% of doctors in US receive favors from drug companies who paid more than $2 billion to different health professionals. Keep in mind that it's only the disclosed value, that many believe to be the tip of a massive iceberg. It's now reported that at least one big pharma company invented the drug first and then the disease that it claim to cure.

We need to understand that past achievements will sustain competitive edge for a shorter period of time in this age of higher mobility of manpower and increasing reach of communication technology. It demands faster development of novel, innovative products and technology. Many times the policy makers and scientists either could not understand or conveniently ignored the bigger picture, as there are not many subject matter experts willing to play the role of a devil’s advocate. Scientists with vested professional and financial interest generally evaluate scientific projects and invariably recommend specific projects that benefit them personally.

It seems that exaggerated data fueled the hype for Jatropha based biofuel programs in countries like India and ended up wasting huge public money. Another recent casualty of over-selling or culture of hype became clearer when many high profile players in the pharmaceutical industry dropped their plans and altogether pulled out from much hyped technique, RNA interference, popularly known as RNAi.

Deteriorating scientific climate and rising incidences of misconduct in both public and private funded universities and R&D units, even in developed countries like USA, have far reaching consequences for the organization, the country and, most importantly, science itself. Developing countries like India with fewer resources need to learn from both the successes and mistakes of more successful countries like USA. Ignoring their mistakes will be no less fatal. India needs to prepare itself to adopt the changing world where, probably, there will be no science superpower to follow.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/CNEvX

End of anti-corruption movement by Anna Hazare?

2012-08-13T11:01:00.000-04:00

Anna Hazare dismantled his team that was fighting against corruption. Now "Team Anna" is forming a political party. None of their demands is met. Janlokpal bill is as far away as before. They probably succumb to the pressure from all political parties and media to contest election. I am not sure why they feel that civil rights movement always have to win election and/or follow the system they are so opposed. I am also not sure how wise that decision is- considering the nature of Indian election and electorate where rampant crime and corruption plays a major role. It becomes clearer when we consider the fact that some of the top leaders in ruling Congress party and current government had a miserable time to win election despite of getting all backing from the powerful party machinery. One of the poster boys for "honesty and wisdom" and our current prime minister failed to win a single election, even from one of the most prosperous and educated constituencies in India- South Delhi in 1999. Dr Manmohan Singh is always a member of the upper house of Parliament (Rajya Sabha). It seems that once hugely popular anti-corruption movement by Anna has lost its steam, at least for now. I am quite confident that no such movement against corruption will be successful in India in near future.

Many Indians seem to think that Arab spring type revolution is more probable and also desirable to cleanse India. They probably forget that any movement or revolution becomes successful when it connects majority of common people. Majority people have to agree with both the goal and the path to achieve it. All the regimes in all the countries where Arab Spring is successful were from the minority sect / community, within Islam. Minority rule over majority people was a major factor there.

Majority of Indians accept corruption as part of life. They adjusted their ‘education’ (rather lack of it) and lives to use that as a tool to ‘succeed’. They feel so comfortable with that historic but no less damaging socio-political reality.

Any anti-corruption movement can never have a great chance to succeed in a country where one third of population is “utterly corrupt” and half is in the “borderline”, as described by Pratyush Sinha- one of India's Central Vigilance Commissioners, country's anti-corruption watchdog. It will not be unfair to say that more than 80% of Indians are basically corrupt. Mass attendance during the first phase of Anna’s movement is more due to curiosity and time pass for many. Almost everyone seems to believe that others need to become honest and less corrupt first. They have enough excuses to justify why s/he personally need to do all sorts of corruption, even crime. Recently one state minister from Utter Pradesh (one of the biggest and most corrupt states in India) openly admitted that “little stealing is acceptable”!

Almost everyone seemed to 'support' Anna Hazare even though they are highly corrupt in their own professional and personal lives. How can any movement against corruption be successful without mass public support in real sense?

Our legacy, our liability, our future

2011-12-28T15:15:00.092-05:00

Can we solve a problem without acknowledging and analyzing the problem before we attempt solving it? Let me put in other words. How a woodpecker find rotten wood that might have its food- the wood boring insects, grubs and ants? Can a woodpecker survive if we ask it not to drum or peck the dead wood? The topic I'll discuss below have a lot to do to these questions, seemingly unrelated. I'll come back to the woodpeckers later.

Yesterday lower house of Indian parliament, popularly known as Lok Sabha, passed (mostly) the government version of Lokpal bill. It is yet to be passed in the upper house, Rajya Sabha. Many think the bill is too weak to have any impact, while many others think that it will increase corruption, instead of minimizing it. On the other hand many believe it as a total betrayal by our elected representatives and parliament considering its promise (formally referred as "parliamentary resolution" or "sense of the house") made in the floor of the parliament to make and pass a strong lokpal bill that will include (i) Citizen's Charter, (ii) lower bureaucracy under Lokpal through an appropriate mechanism, and (iii) establishment of Lokayukta in the States. Today Anna Hazare ended his fast in Mumbai. Many of his followers are disappointed. They think the fight against corruption is over, at least for now. Many are worried about the long term consequences of our culture and social acceptance of corruption.

The problem of extremist movement arises from systemic blockage of civic protests, as happened to many previous socio-political movements and as happening to Anna Hazare’s anti-corruption movement. We are yet to show any sign of maturity as a democracy and learn from our past mistakes. Our system in independent India has been doing it since its birth in 1947. Our 'elected' representatives and ruling elites inherited the legacy of the foreign rulers, since 1192- start of Muslim rule. Such elites include mainly the blue eyed boys of Muslim invaders (for ~600 years) and then the British (for ~200 years), who facilitated their rule over this country- in form of maharajah nawab, jaminder, feudal landlord, businessman and bureaucrat (including police, judiciary, civil administration bosses). It is also true that many of such maharajahs nawabs etc were nothing but local dacoits or leaders of organized crimes (that include many businessmen). Such elites were remunerated not only by prestigious awards, powerful positions and blood-money, but also awarded admission to prestigious British universities like Cambridge and Oxford. That was like passport to culture and education accepted to our ruling elites. Responsible positions in civil administration were severely compromised. In subsequent years, oppression was accompanied with the awe and ego of 'culture' and 'education' of the scions of the looters aka rajas, nawabs, jaminders and bureaucrats. That tradition continued. It did not take much time for British trained wolves to get into 'Indian' sheep outfit.

Emerging elites start buying famous books and other items of art to decorate their homes and offices. Such books, movies and other items of art are hardly used, less understood, least followed. Another preferred way to get reputation as 'cultured' is to get the son/daughter (mainly daughters are sacrificed for such noble act!) married to a spouse already having heavyweight degree(s) or sending the would-be groom to buy some degrees, preferably from abroad. Such seemingly 'educated' and 'cultured' sons-in-law are excellent showpieces to advertise the glory of the family. By the way, this type of offers are not valid for brides, generally speaking.

No, such people are not much worried about any certificate of honesty, as they know that ignorance of general people allow them to accept heavyweight degrees and employment hierarchy as the gold standard for all virtues like honesty, hard work and talent. They would afford to ignore few skeptics who still dare to question why so many of our 'highly educated' politicians and other elites are so corrupt, least talented, but no less gifted with awards. Paid headline news in national media are not so uncommon these days. On the other hand, our typical 'good' students from less fortunate background seldom afford the courage and ability to ignore the easy and fast track to succeed, provocation of assured career, and most importantly, wealth and power- simply by being associated with such powerful and wealthy families.

Severe shortage of trained manpower and commercialization of education in western countries made the job easier. Gradually Oxbridge was replaced by american universities as the glory and power of British empire eroded, new world order established. Occasionally such elites promote backbone-less cronies as we see in some high positions, only to show that one can prosper only if s/he obeys them - the ruling elites. In short, the culture of endowment, distribution of national scholarships/fellowships/awards to cronies and relatives continued unhindered in independent India.

That culture of a feudal society and all pervasive corruption has another serious implication. It does not allow natural leadership quality to grow. In such a society people with actual leadership quality have to face severe consequence- ruthlessly crushed if not supported by some god-father/mother or powerful dynasty. The vacuum in leadership are filled by non-natural, promoted 'leaders'. There is no internal democracy in majority, if not all, of the political parties in India. That's why there is hardly any chance for India to get its own Barack Obama in near foreseeable future. That trend is not limited to politics or bureaucracy but present in almost every field including private sector companies.

Of course, not everyone belong to this category but majority does and it follows a pattern. You can describe it as 'profiling'- successfully used by security agencies and policy makers. It's the same reason a person can expect little more scrutiny while applying for US visa from its embassy/consulate in Delhi or Mumbai as compared to Kolkata.

The cycle of deprivation, oppression and exploitation continued almost unhindered since 1947, as the British handed over the right to rule (not govern) to more dishonest and no less oppressive desi “brown sahibs”, who sometimes behave more British than actual British rulers. On top of that, the good-for-nothing fellows who failed as students were groomed by mainstream political parties as student "leaders". Then modern day criminals, big businessmen joined the loot.

Now several business tycoons are members of our parliament, many in Rajya Sabha (the upper house) where members are nominated by political parties without public referendum. There are an estimated 300 MPs with assets worth Rs one crore (10 million) or more in the new Lok Sabha, with 543 members having combined asset of Rs 3,075 crore. Now the number of crorepatis is almost double, from 154 in the 14th Lok Sabha. Four MPs in Lok Sabha have assets worth more than Rs 100 crore. If anyone still thinks that these rich and powerful people are there to serve the country and its people then read this article published in Economic Times which describes how "MPs have managed to find a place in many House panels despite having business interests in the sectors concerned". Please keep it in mind that the above information is only the declared asset value where the most powerful Indian politician, Sonia Gandhi, has only Rs 1.38 crore total asset including a house in Italy that is valued around Rs 18 lakhs (1.8 million) (USD ~36,000) and no car, as per her election affidavit.

The trend accelerated fast after Indira Gandhi institutionalized corruption. National institutions were ruined, started resembling party offices and increasingly being dominated by cronies. In the meantime, we committed another grave mistake. We kept most of our old laws, bureaucracy, police, judiciary that the British introduced in their native colony, which was significantly different than what they had in Britain. Our policy makers never seriously tried to reform the core institutions, even though talks of reforms are going around since ages.

Last few weeks I was watching debates on Lokpal Bill in Indian TV channels. Most of the politicians, mainly from the ruling party, talked as if they are the kings. We all seem to have the constitutional obligation to obey them and, most importantly, those who support Anna Hazare and Anna himself is nothing but insignificant bugs which "would have been crushed if our great forefathers, great administrators, were present" (as per one prominent Congress leader in NDTV).

Many believe that it is now pay-back time. Fast spread of naxals, increasing tendency of general citizens to take laws into their hands, more support towards hartals, bandhs and gheraos by common Indians now (as compared to 1971) are just few symptoms of the all pervasive rot. Check this BBC article that says- "today 223 districts - India has 636 districts - in 20 states are "Maoist affected", up from 55 districts in nine states six years ago. Ninety of the affected districts, according to the government, are experiencing "consistent violence". PM Manmohan Singh calls it the country's "greatest internal security challenge". Such facts show the increasing distrust over our political system and civil governance, more so after 1991 economic liberalization. That is supported by many reports, fact and figures. One such reports tells- Indian government gave three times more subsidy to rich Indians (Rs 4.6 lakh corers) as compared to middle class and poor people (Rs 1.54 lakh corers). It is high time for us to ponder why India is among the worst of the emerging economies in terms of poverty, income inequality and social discrimination since globalization (i.e. since 1991- in case of India). Emerging economies like Indonesia, Argentina effectively reduced social and income inequalities significantly in recent times while India is among the worst affected ones.

Anna's movement is (probably, was) a rare opportunity to bring a systemic change in our system of governance and force our "elected" representatives and public servants to govern- not rule. Only those get democracy who deserve it and ready to fight for it. By now we know that chanting the mantra of peace does not guarantee peace. The same way, chanting the mantra of "parliamentary democracy" and shouting from the roof that “parliament is supreme” does not transform a corrupt, feudal society into a productive, prosperous democracy. One must be able and ready to pay the price as and when needed. At the end of the day, we get what we actually deserve. It does not matter if we like it or not!

Remember the woodpecker whom we asked not to drum or peck when we started this article? Wood boring insects, grubs, ants are not the only food woodpecker can eat. In fact, adult woodpecker change its diet according to what food sources are most abundant. In the fall, nuts, seeds and fruit are popular because of plentiful natural harvests. In the spring and summer, these birds feast primarily on insects that provide high levels of protein for breeding birds and growing hatchlings. If we ban our woodpecker to drum or peck dead woods it will not only create rippling affects in the relevant ecosystem but also will have huge negative impact on future generations of woodpeckers, without not-so-immediate and acute impact on the adults.

**added later: The bill was not passed in Rajya Sabha. The house was adjourned without voting amid chaos after a debate stretched to midnight.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/ehGPBY

How can we, in personal capacity, help reforming basic education in India?

2011-11-12T11:50:00.007-05:00

Some time ago I suggested giving importance to basic education at primary and high school level to have better quality of scientists and other professionals. I also think that there is absolutely no point to waste public money in setting up (mostly) useless new, “elite” institutes at this time. It will surely provide employment for some but will not bring much positive change in the quality or productivity of Indian higher education and research. Quantity does not guarantee quality unless there is the desire and transparency in the motivation.

Initially I used to be optimistic about Non Governmental Organization, NGO (non-profit organization- as popularly known in the USA) operated or promoted schools. Later I realized that majority of such NGOs are equally corrupt and counter productive for our national interest, operated within and/or outside the country. India has the largest number of NGOs in the world (3.3 million registered ones, as in 2009, with many more unregistered) with more than 20 million employees, mostly unpaid or under-paid volunteers- nicely exploited for their temporary infatuation (for majority), some fashion and few passion (besides the usual compulsion to have a job and/or experience, applicable to any other sector). It is alleged that more than 90% of Indian NGOs are corrupt. Many big business houses, politician or political party affiliated organizations, individual entrepreneurs and even organized crime syndicates start NGOs for various reasons- starting from acting as "pressure groups" (lobby) to promote a product or technology or public policy that benefit it, to money laundering and human trafficking. Indian government is the biggest donor (Rs 18,000 crore in the XI plan), followed by foreign contributors (worth around Rs 10,000 crore in 2007-08). Around Rs 2,000 crore was donated to established religious bodies such as the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams. Lately individual donors are emerging as the biggest and most lucrative source of funds (1).

In short, motivation for majority of Indian NGOs boils down to profiteering and tax incentives, not only from that specific venture but also for other organizations owned by the same company or individual than dedication towards any social or national cause. Due to that overwhelming majority, few dedicated NGOs also lose credibility and that affect its financial prospect. Almost none of those NGO operated/promoted schools have any idea about education, leave alone its desire or ability. It is just another business as usual. Many political and business heavyweights in India now have schools, colleges and even universities that are pathetic in quality and motivation, nonetheless doing roaring business. It is because majority parents have no idea about education either and few, who have, do not have any desire, rather able to gather the courage, to groom their children as “educated”.

The few honest efforts to run schools suffer not only from resource crunch but also are confused if they should continue that effort. The students from such schools do not do very well in competitive exams and job market, as compared to rot memorization and coaching based kids and/or kids in cities from affluent families. Gradually such schools lose its sheen among parents, particularly among those parents who can pay, and become establishments for less-privileged kids who have no better option). Mostly run by few benevolent, reasonably honest donors and government handouts. Dependence on government fund ruin its independence, attract political interference that ultimately destroy its purpose. Most of the time the institution dies with the death of the patron, who established the school. Then local mafia or political leaders become its president or sectary and party cadres become the teachers and administrators.

One patron of such a school once jokingly told me that, "I need to open my own industry to recruit the students from my school". His next statement was more serious, "not many organizations, public or private, prefer to recruit our students. Even the most brilliant and dedicated ones are forced to go away (from our island) and do petty clerical job. That too if s/he is fortunate. Because we do not teach them how to score 100% marks, can not teach them to become 'street smart', speak fluent English to get the BPO jobs". Whatever the person might say, one can easily understand the impact of his school among local people, among the community. The community is economically poor but very clean (both personal hygiene and community-wise), disciplined, honest and, most surprisingly, none of them (I talked to) ever realized even the need to have a police station! They still have excellent sense of collective responsibility towards the community. Wealth distribution is more or less equal, no caste or religious division (so far I can witness), no crime whatsoever. They follow laws and ethics without any fear or force from any police. There was no police station in the whole island. Some might be illiterate, yet, collectively they are more educated and developed in every sense. Many will be surprised to know where I found that excellent community and the school! It was in one of the remote islands in Andaman, Rangat island, about 200 km away from the hustle and bustle of Port Blair. The community was established around mid 1950s, (mostly) by refugee Bengali community settled in Andaman after partition of India.

No, those local students never top UPSC exam or secured the top positions in any 'prestigious' joint entrance exam, probably never joined IISc or IIT or IIM type 'elite' institute or get any foreign scholarship/fellowship. They are not expected to get any either in foreseeable future. US and Europe are as alien to them as moon to many of us. There I got one of the best models of education and students I ever experienced anywhere in India. Probably we will lose that soon, as heavy flow of 'civilized' and 'educated' tourists, businessmen and bureaucrats started pouring in from outside- polluting that remote, (so far) peaceful and civilized part of India (2). Many of these 'outsiders' never learned the basic to respect other human beings particularly if they have darker skin, not to treat them as animals in a sanctuary. Many 'highly cultured and educated' tourists and 'outsiders' settled there go for thrill ride looking for the tribal people, just like African safari to see wild animals in Masai Mara. Local people are worried, but feel helpless. There I met one ex-army officer, an excellent gentleman, who settled there to enjoy both natural and human ("Insaaniyat"- as he described me) beauty. He was a very worried man too, but determined to continue to fight the losing battle.

I realized that education and quality of school reflect mentality of local people and the community. Just yesterday I met an young Indian couple in front of an Indian grocery store in a US city. They parked their car in a parking lot reserved for handicapped people. There was enough empty parking space but that handicapped one was the nearest to the shop they went. The car had a big "Ohio State University Alumni" sticker to advertise the owner's "education", but did not have the permit to use handicapped parking, which is legally binding all-time-display, to use such facility. When I suggested the couple not to misuse the facility, they started telling me how that is none of my business and suggested me to do whatever I feel like (in the typical irritating tone, prevalent in some parts of northern India)! Their "education" taught them that maintaining law and order is the responsibility of only police and government - common people "have no business" there.

I was looking for an apology and simple assurance that they would not be doing it again. Instead their arrogance and defense to support their illegal activity prompted me reporting it to the police. The car had a booster seat at the back. I assume they have kid(s). What type of education the child like to get? Indian upbringing made them wiser about how law enforcement in countries like India work or need to work. Naturally, such people are "more practical" and succeed in India and also enjoy more influence on law enforcement than those fools who naively try to enforce laws or ethics. These people learned Such people practically destroyed India and will contribute doing the same wherever they go- Andaman or USA, knowingly or unknowingly.

If we ourselves are not honest, do not value ethics and morality, no law can force us to change that. No formal education or school can teach that. So long parents want to groom only “toppers” and desire to have some heavyweight degrees for their kids that (they think) will allow them to earn more money and power, we will only have that type of “education” (rather lack of it.) We can reform education in India, or probably anywhere in the world, if you and me, as parents, give lesson of morality and ethics, teach our kids to respect and uphold honesty and justice by being the role model. Then only we will start producing world class scientists and other professionals in that country.

It is an individual effort first. If we succeed at home, then it makes sense to talk about systemic change in the society and in the government.

Probably my long post will make no sense to many "educated" people and I apologize to them.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/qdl1C1

Early evolution of religion ushered the dawn of scientific research

2011-10-12T09:11:00.033-04:00

Gupi (name changed) was born in a typical conservative Hindu family in India. He visited us for few weeks. It seemed that Gupi presented some tough challenges for his traditional Hindu parents. I think the same challenges are there for many parents and their beloved children who are now preparing to face the world with increasingly higher connectivity, both in terms of personal interactions and digital (in cyber space), in India and abroad. The chance to encounter people with different or even totally opposite tradition and religious beliefs is becoming higher in this era of higher mobility, rapidly expanding communication technology and shrinking personal space. Problems for Gupi and his parents mainly started with religion. The issues became more acute as both Gupi and his parents wanted him to be either a scientist or an engineer.

Many eminent personalities believe that the chance of success of our future generation will largely depend on their understanding of different cultures, which mainly comes from upbringing in multicultural societies as in this country, America. But to get the benefits from the diversity of a multicultural society people need to understand some very basics of human evolution; not only to succeed but sometimes even to survive. It becomes more important in foreign countries where one’s religion and/or traditions are among the minorities. Gupi is one of such kids, growing up abroad where his religion is among the minorities.

Religion has a huge impact on our tradition and culture, the way we like to live. It is also a very sensitive issue. I urge my readers not to take this article personally, but objectively. The purpose of this article is not to hurt anyone’s faith, not to conclude on the issue but to provoke higher level of debate and consolidation of logical thinking. It is believed that both religious and political allegiances are mostly hereditary than rational. These two are also the most important sources for conflict (and both social and political corruption) since ages and remain so till today. In this article I’ll try to deal with the religious issues and leave the political part to our Anna Hazare and his team. In fact, I was encouraged to write this piece after my brief encounter with that 11 year old boy, Gupi’s dilemma and Anna Hazare’s fast to fight corruption.

Let’s start with the very early period of human civilization. During that time humans felt insecure and helpless in front of natural calamities and search for food. They gradually tried to adjust, understand and overcome the problems when possible. Their main strategy was to organize people and act as a group. It increased their chance of success. That gave rise to community living and group activities like hunting, cultivation etc. During the process people gradually understood the problems more critically and also became aware of their limitations. That awareness provoked some to conceive the existence of supernatural powers, which they thought were behind all those forces that they cannot control. They also started believing that such supernatural forces strike when they are not happy, just like they do. They tried to keep the spirits happy, developed a set of rituals, later known as “worship”. Each group of people tried to conceive the supernatural powers according to their own experiences. If they liked any particular food or drink, they used to offer those to their Gods. Gods also started looking like them, physically. The same God is not exactly the same in southern India as compared to that of northern India. Our current, but totally misleading, perception about Jesus Christ with blue eyes and blond hair is just another fascinating story in that regard.

Even the definition of God varies from region to region. Ravana may be a demon in most of India but many people in Sri Lanka and southern India consider him as God. Many believe that Ravana was a better king or administrator, if one compares prosperity of his kingdom with that of Ram. Ajodhya was not “golden” but Lanka was! Of course the package (for Ravana) came with the characteristics that were so common among king-class, elite people (even today), which ultimately caused his defeat and death, just like many other great kings in history.

Now coming back from Satya yuga to our Kali yuga, which started on 18th February 3102 BC as per Brahma Vaivarta Purana and Wikipedia. As most of the natural calamities used to be the same i.e. rain, flood, storm-wind, draught-sun, wild beasts etc, many of such supernatural powers had high similarities (though not identical) world over. Gradually all such concepts and activities gave rise to religion. To cut the long story short, religion was developed to make societies more organized and to involve majority population to participate in different activities or rituals for betterment of the society. Religion made implementing the rules much easier. Both remuneration and punishment was introduced. It gave rise to the concept of virtue and vice. Breaking the rules was equated to sin or vice while obeying those became virtues. Here we should keep in mind that all such rules were made by human, most probably the pack leaders of the groups. During early phase of human evolution and initial days of religion, almost everyone was busy to ensure their survival and growth. They all were interested to search reasons (to solve problems), in other words, the truth (mainly behind natural calamities, food supply and reproduction). Later life became a bit easier due to many innovations and inventions. Then the main evolution of religion started, as we see it today.

Ancient religions are more inclined to have idol worshipping. They have many Gods to take care of natural causes like wind, rain, flood, life threatening animals, birth, death etc. Examples of such religion are Hinduism, religions in ancient Egypt, Greece etc. Many tribes in India and abroad practice this type of religion with many Gods and idol worshipping. More recent religions like Islam, Christianity are more like ideology. Almost all of such recent religions conceive a single God. The person who introduced that ideology became the prophet, mostly the “last” prophet. Such differences indicate the motive behind introduction of such religions. It's like establishing an ideology than to motivate survival of a group of people. The same analogy can be drawn to other non-religious socio-political evolutions, e.g Marxism. It’s the same psychology with which a king rules his subjects and advertises his supremacy. Evolution of recent religions was possible as life became easier. Creation and spread of such recent religions also affected more ancient religions. Leaders of those ancient religions tried to invent new rituals to strengthen their grips over power, and wealth associated with power. “Satidaha” (burning of brides), caste division, no beef eating, many marriages by men but not by women etc by Hindus are some of this type of new rituals. As people from different religions came closer, competition to prove ones’ supremacy became more intense.

Historians and anthropologists widely accept that beef was widely eaten in ancient India. Cow got its holy status around 500 AD, coinciding with an agricultural boom on the subcontinent. The people, whom we consider as the creator of Hinduism, not only used to eat beef but also prescribed beef for many health reasons and illnesses. An ancient Hindu text, Manusmriti (200BC to 200AD), lists cow as one of several animals whose meat can be eaten. One of the two great Indian epics - the Mahabharata - speaks of beef being a delicacy served to esteemed guests. For a quick reference one can read an article published in BBC on 9th August 2001. It was published after few fundamentalists, claiming to be Hindu, started law and order problems and threatening author, Prof D N Jha, for his book “Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary Traditions”.

Even the languages, which were only the means of expression, became associated with specific religions. Arabic became Islamic, Latin became Christian, and Sanskrit became a Hindu language. Many Hindus started believing that anything written in Sanskrit must be true and (mostly) holy. Here we should keep in mind that Sanskrit was not the language of common people but of socio-political elites of ancient India.

To maintain the social order and supremacy, group-leaders did not encourage asking question. They started implementing their own version of “truth” in the name of religion. It became the norm. Gradually every religion started demanding un-questionable faith. “Search for truth” soon became the fight to establish one’s own version of truth. Now we see the fight among human beings to prove that their version of “truth” is more “true” than that of others! This deformed version of “religion” allegedly is the single most important reason for human sufferings, conflicts and death in the past and remains so even today. Religion took a massive blow to serve its original intended purpose as we invented constitution, laws and lately democracy to maintain social discipline. This presented a great dilemma for many, particularly for those who live in secular democracies like India and the USA.

Many cannot stop the temptation to cite famous people, mainly famous scientists like Einstein to “prove” religion. Let me quote a letter written by no other but older, more matured Albert Einstein on January 3rd 1954, a year before his death. It says (as published in many newspapers, including “The Telegraph” of UK on 13th May 2008)- “The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this”. Einstein, who died the following year aged 76, did not spare Judaism from his criticism, believing Jewish people were in no way “chosen” by God. He wrote: “For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people.”

Our own Achariya Prafulla Chandra Roy, the noted chemist and among the first few Indian entrepreneurs to set up knowledge based Industry, Bengal Chemical, in India on 12th April, 1901, once tried to identify “since when and why India cannot undertake objective scientific research” (my own translation from Bengali texts). After a long investigation he wrote a book, “History of Hindu Chemistry”. There he identified distorted interpretation and practice of religion (more specifically the Hindu religion) and heinous caste system as the root cause. In an article titled, “knowledge of technical arts and decline of scientific spirit”, he was more elaborate. He specifically identified two people – first one is Saint Shankaracharaya and then saint Manu (who introduced stricter caste based social division and marriage among Hindus). For a quick reference one can check the short article published in reputed Bengali magazine, “Desh” (2nd February 2011 issue). The sad state of affairs of Hindus, mainly in Bengal, becomes clear when we witness recent madness to celebrate rather irrelevant and mundane religious rituals and superstitions like Kadwa Chauth, Dhanteras, Ganesh Chotruthi etc., which was not heard in Bengal before, but not even a fraction to remember this great Indian scientist and entrepreneur (1861-1944).

There are many people who consider themselves Hindu yet totally deny existence of God. One such group of Hindu sites the ancient Sanskrit scripture, Sankhya- tattva-kaumudi. It argues that a perfect God can have no need to create a world, and if God's motive is kindness, Samkhya questions whether it is reasonable to call into existence beings who while non-existent had no suffering. Samkhya postulates that a benevolent deity ought to create only happy creatures, not an imperfect world like the real world!

Now let’s come out of such controversies and share the good news. A recent survey by PEW Forum on Religion and Public Life, a part of the famous American think-tank Pew Research Center, concluded that atheists and agnostics are among the highest-scoring groups in a survey of religious knowledge, outperforming “believers”. If we re-frame that statement, we can safely say that those people who know more about religion believe less in it. Another PEW survey concluded that, “America is among the most religious of the world’s developed nations. Nearly six-in-ten US adults say that religion is “very important” in their lives”. The Association of Religion Data Archives (ARDA) of USA concluded in 2002 that, “the influence of religion is decreasing in all the developed countries surveyed so far. In USA, about 51.6% of people think that it is decreasing and about 37.5% believe that it is increasing”. A recent article in BBC pointed out that, “Religion may become extinct in nine nations, study says”. These nine countries include mostly developed ones- Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Switzerland and the Czech Republic. It's reported in 1998 that about 93% of "great" scientists of USA (members of National Academy of Sciences) expressed disbelief or doubt in the existence of God.

Generally speaking, less religious countries are more innovative, more prosperous, and happier too (as per UN happiness report. US ranking is declining for last many years.)

I personally think there is no conflict between science and religion, as many believe or might expect. It will not be right to say that Achariya PC Roy was less Hindu (to do excellent “objective scientific research”). But that will only be true if we keep in mind the real meaning of religion and can logically follow its gradual evolution. The people whom we think are the founding fathers, invented “religion” to seek truth, as I indicated before. I could not include “founding mothers” simply because almost all mainstream religions are male dominated and follow policies mostly biased against women. It is almost unimaginable to see a woman as the Pope (the head of Catholic Church) or a Shankaracharya in Kanchipuram or the Imam of any great mosque. Nevertheless, all those father figures and many great women scholars used to seek truth with the tools and techniques available to them. They very effectively used the best tools they had, i.e. their brain. They developed the ability to ask questions and seek answers, not for monetary gain or fame. Are these not the same very basic requirements to become a true scientist even today? If you do not have those, no degree or job designation can make anyone a scientist. Science is not just learning few techniques, following protocols, rote memorization of some information/data or even publications and getting awards. To me science is nothing but searching the truth and solving problems.

During the course of evolution we lost the focus and forgot the real meaning of religion. We started following some (mostly) meaningless rituals in the name of either religion or tradition. There comes the conflict. Meditation is not just sitting idle in a specific posture for a period of time to watch soap operas or movies or sports on TV later. It was to prepare our mind to be able to concentrate on more challenging problems. A true religious person will not undertake any sort of corruption or dishonesty using some mundane rituals as shield. The same is true for a scientist. Eating beef does not make anyone less Hindu. Not eating beef also does not make the highly corrupt, dishonest person a Hindu or a religious entity either. To me, spirituality indicates purification of one’s own mind by achieving the ability to think clearly and logically towards making the world a better place. Unless we can do that, there is no way that following some rituals or traditions will make us either spiritual or religious. It is immaterial to me if you gather strength by thinking some real (e.g. our own parents, spouses, children, friends etc), or imaginary figures (God, Goddess etc), or from nature (rather mysteries of nature), or personal conviction of logic and facts if you are an honest person with the ability to think clearly and the courage to talk straight. If we follow Vivekananda we should understand that one does not need to pray to God or offer pujas all the time to become religious, if we are honest and have the ability to fight for it.

Short link- http://goo.gl/hVwSl

Clinical trials claimed almost 1,600 lives (officially) in India in just 3 yrs

2011-09-25T10:21:00.019-04:00

The disturbing article published in Indian Express on 25th September 2011. It says, “nearly 1,600 people died during clinical trials of drugs conducted by various multinational pharmaceutical companies in the 2008-10 period but the compensation was paid only in 22 cases, according to the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS)”. The cost of 22 lives of those who volunteered in such clinical trials is just Rs 53.33 lakh ($ 112,000). Most of the volunteers hardly have any idea about the risks. They also do not get many of the safeguards, enforced in any developed country, to protect their health, mainly after trials. According to the RTI reply, the number of registered clinical trials in the country from 2007 to 2010 stood at 1,502.

While outsourcing drug trials save significant money for the pharmaceutical companies, the cost of human lives and suffering for both the trial participants in developing countries and drug users in developed countries is likely to be horrendous. Many have questioned how appropriate and ethical it is to test drugs intended for the American and European markets in developing countries. Duke University`s recent report, Ethical and Scientific Implications of the Globalization of Clinical Research, labeled clinical trials in developing countries as scientifically questionable and morally inappropriate. The study noted that genetic and other population differences could render results that did not apply to the target population. The report also raised concerns over the role money might play in recruiting poor volunteers. As recently as 1990, only 271 trials of drugs intended for American use were being conducted in foreign countries. By 2008, the number had risen to 6,485. According to a National Institutes of Health (NIH) database 58,788 such foreign trials have been conducted in 173 countries outside the United States since 2000. In 2008 alone, 80 percent of the applications submitted to the FDA for new drugs contained data from foreign clinical trials.

India is increasingly being used not only by big pharma and other biotech companies from abroad, but also by many highly dubious Indian companies in areas like clinical trials, testing (and production) of transgenic crop varieties, “research” on harmful chemicals etc. Another such industry is asbestos, widely used in India. Most of the countries in the world had banned asbestos. India is yet to ban its use, production and import despite many reports to show its damaging impact on environmental and public health. One such report says India is on the cusp of a devastating asbestos cancer epidemic. There are many such industries operating successfully and with impunity in India.

Leave alone the smaller players, who operate under the radar, even the big Indian companies are alleged to having increasing involvement in such practices. In March 2004, the Supreme Court of India hauled up two top biotech companies in India, the Hyderabad-based Shanta Biotech and Bangalore-based Biocon India for "openly conducting illegal clinical trials of new drugs on unsuspecting patients". One can watch this interesting TV documentary to know more about it, how it works.

Our aspiring future scientists and young talents suffer from such practices in the name of research. Academic research also gets affected by the power of such businesses. It has huge long term negative consequences, even in terms of manpower development and quality of research. We need to keep in mind that quality of Indian research is steadily declining since 1996, when systemic data collection started, despite of huge increase in funding and number of new institutes established by both Government and private entities.

It seems that anything is justified in post-1991 India in the name of investment and / or research. It gives our political masters and industry captains the opportunity to advertise their successes, to both Indian and global audience, with a huge cost to the country and its future scientific potential.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/4oSQjk

Aranyak

2011-06-23T16:37:00.032-04:00

To tell you the truth, I was not impressed at all when I first read Arnayak long time ago, during my school days. We had a small piece from that classic novel in our Bengali textbook. That time it was so boring, monotonous description of nature of our area, Chotonagpur plateau, in India. That description was so common, ordinary to me. I used to see many of the natural wonders described in the book on a daily basis and reading about the same in a book, and that too in a text book, did not excite me. I started reading the novel due to my father's forceful request but left it halfway. It was lying, neglected, in a cupboard with many other old books. I forgot about it.

After a long time my wife bought the book. I started reading it. Now I realized that probably I did the right thing by not reading that classic literature during my teen, when I was too immature to understand nature, human relationship and relationship of nature with human beings. It provoked so many emotions, so many pictures of my lost childhood and more importantly my lost innocence amidst rough, tough nature of chotonagpur plateau. During my childhood I was almost like of some the kids described in that novel.

The novel was written during 1937-1939 by Bibhutibhusan Bandhyodadhya. It was mainly based on his personal experience during 1924-1930, as an estate manager for a landlord Khilat Chandra Ghosh in wild Azamabad - Fulkia – Lobtulia areas of Bihar state. To understand the novel we probably will need to know little more about the author.

Bibhutibhusan was born in 1894 in a village near Kalyani, about 100km away from Kolkata, in British India at his maternal uncle's house, following the tradition that child birth should happen in mother's paternal home or maternal uncle’s home- to save husband and in-laws from the hassles of child birth, to ensure proper care for the new mom and the child and observing so many rituals and restrictions, mainly for new mother, of course. His father, Mahananda Bandyopadhyay, was a sanskrit scholar and a kathak, one who used to tell stories for a living. His home was near Gopalnagar police station in Bongaon, North Twenty Four Parganas. Bhibhutibhusan studied in Bongaon High School, one of the oldest institutions in Brithish India. Incidentally, he also taught at this school at the beginning of his working life. His early days were spent in abject poverty, so typical of an honest scholar and priest, which is still a reality in India. Nevertheless, he fought his way to complete his undergraduate degree in history with distinction, at the Surendranath College, Kolkata. Though he was admitted to the MA and law classes, he could not continue his studies.

He was married to Gouri Devi. She died in childbirth after only a year of their marriage. Bibhutibhushan again married Rama Chattopadhyay when he was 46. Their only son, Taradas, was born in 1947. Bibhutibhusan died on 1 November 1950, of a heart attack while staying at Ghatshila, in Jharkhand state of Chotonagpur plateau.

Despite of having a childhood in rural India and traveled extensively in that part of India, I did not have much idea about the lives of the common people described in the novel. I had the curiosity but satisfied with watching it from a distance. I neither could gather the courage to proceed further. I started wondering when Satyacharan (the person who narrates the story in the novel) questions himself, “what people want- success or happiness? Why should we succeed if that takes away happiness from us? I know so many people who had succeeded but lost all their happiness. Our consciousness looses its sheen with too much indulgence. We lose the ability to wonder, to become happy. Life becomes so boring, colorless and meaningless. Our minds become too polished to express or extract happiness”. I am not sure if my translation conveys the real meaning of the statement made by Bibhutibusan through Satyacharan. No, I did not have the ability to understand the statement the time I first read Aranyak. Now, I think, I can.

Characters like Jugal Prasad, Raju Pande (Panree), Dhautal Sahu, Nandalal Ojha, Rashbihari Singh, Chutu Singh, Motuk Nath Pandit, Asrafi Tindel, Dhaturia are so real, at least to me, that I could not but recollect so many people that I can assign those characters to. Probably we all know such people around us.

The descriptions of women in that wild, less forgiving nature indicated Bibhutibhusan’s sensitivity and understanding of human relationship. I really pity those men, those societies who try to strangle, suffocate women and think they can enjoy the charm, the company and even sexuality of women. How stupid they are! They do not know what they are missing. The ease with which tribal princess Bhanumati; Kunta, the daughter of a "baiji" (notch girl) and widow of a Rajput; Manchi- the simple, lively, inquisitive young adult and wife of an old man, are described shows maturity of Bibhutibhusan in man-woman relationship, especially in our highly conservative society, that too in British India.

Bibhutibhusan's attitude towards caste and religion is so evident in many places of the novel. He has no problem to eat and stay with people not only from different caste but also from different religions. The character of Satyacharan was and still is a model of an ideal administrator. It seems that to become a good administrator we need to screen people with both heart and head, not by some rot memorization and coaching based screening test that we use now to make our civil servants. Probably that's why, despite of having the most competitive screening test, Indian civil service is among the most corrupt and ineffective in Asia (1, 2) and "the most stifling" in the world (3). It seems that a head without a heart can only bring darkness to the world.

Many of us, if not majority, still insult people based on social, professional and economic hierarchy. Many of us feel proud thinking they are the descendants of true Aryans and loudly insult people who does not qualify as Aryans - like the tribal king Dobru Panna Birwardi, Jogru Panna or beautiful Bhanumati. We kill so many Dhaturias by not allowing them to learn and express what they love and excel in. We are so blinded by our own distorted interpretation of “education” and “success” that a retired deputy magistrate and his family members never think before they insult Satyacharan, riding a horse in a forest with not so sophisticated dress. Such people hardly care to express their ignorance and stupidity while insulting local, tribal people and their culture. Does our sense of "green" (a catchy phrase for marketing of almost any product these days) have developed in last one century to think before we pollute forests, sea beaches, historical places and many other places of beauty with garbage from their civilized picnic or noisy partying, as we see in almost each and every place in India these days?

Probably such attitude among older (and a small section of current) generation of Bengalis gave rise to mass annoyance, if not anger, against Bengalis in all those places where Bengalis flocked in mass for routine outings or travel or settled outside Kolkata (which became synonymous to Bengal)- be it within Bengal itself (any person who is not from Kolkata is surely "uncivilized"!) or in North Eastern states, Bihar, UP, MP, Orissa or any other place in India. Many famous Bengali personalities, who used to regularly go to the "west" (west to Bengal- i.e. mainly Bihar, MP, UP and Orissa) for health reason, behaved in the same pathetic way. Majority of them not only exploited and insulted local people and their culture but also practically contributed nothing positive there. Probably it is now payback time for Bengalis in places like North Eastern states, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh etc. Later that urban "civilization" spread all across India. What many Bengalis did a century ago, many other Indians learned and continue to do it today. It gave rise to mass frustration and sometimes anger. That is partly responsible for fast spread of extremist movements like Naxals. Some of such naive Indians taste the same medicine when they travel or live abroad. Then they start understanding and then shouting about racial discrimination. They never understood, leave alone analyze, their own behaviors in their own country, against their own people. It is not at all surprising, to me at least, that India is still a highly feudal, hierarchical and racist society.

I am really surprised with the foresightedness of Bibhutibhusan when he questions our model of “development”, when we destroy our century old natural and human wealth for “success” of few people and logic for establishment and spread of slum culture. He did that at the first half of 20th century, when India was much better (relatively speaking) in terms of natural and human beauty. He seemed to be knowing the consequences of spread of third-world style of "development" of towns and metros like Mumbai, Kolkata, Delhi that invariably increase poverty. Have you ever seen filthy open drains, stinking people or crying, malnourished babies running all over in a (economically) poor, remote village anywhere in India, untouched by industrial exploitation? Probably no. Just wait till a factory comes up and see the immediate change!

Have you observed Mumbai, the most prosperous and the financial capital of "shining" India, from the sky? It looks more like a slum city with tarpaulin and blue plastic roof, slums all over with few scattered high rises. Can you imagine a $2 billion house, the costliest in the world, in the midst of sprawling slum anywhere, in any developed country? Probably it is possible only in a third world country like India. Mumbai has more than 60% of its population live in slums (4). Slums have increased dramatically since 1950s, despite of so many developmental programs. A person with 2 million rupees ($ 44,000) annual income, which constitute probably less than 1% of its population, does not dare to buy a decent apartment (leave alone having own house) in a decent locality and settle there in that financial capital. Honest economic activities in those cities are not sufficient to support a family there with decent living. Money from all over India is being accumulated in few metro cities. Yet many consider that as development! It is even more surprising that not many people and our policy makers understand what we are losing while trying to impose “development”, that not so educated Bibhutibhusan understood with his BA in history degree, about a hundred years ago!

Our fight against corruption and Anna Hazare

2011-06-17T12:10:00.073-04:00

Probably we all are now aware of the recent uproar against corruption in India. People are angry. If anyone providing them an outlet to vent their frustration they readily grab it and participate in such “mass movements”. Our news hungry 24x7 media is more than happy to oblige anyone with an agenda. Everyone seems to be in favour of such movements. Naturally there is a huge market for it. Even corporate houses sponsoring some of the events. It is really surprising that if everyone is so against corruption, why we have such an extensive and intense corruption in almost every field of life there! The answer may lie in another observation. An office clerk joins Anna Hazare in the evening after taking bribe to protest against A Raja's 2G scam, a student after cheating in exam, a teacher after completing his private tuition evading his teaching duties in the school, a doctor after prescribing some useless tests to unsuspecting patients and so on.

In reality, Indian society never learned what is democracy, what justice means since long; long before we got independence, long before British occupied the land. It is so contrasting if we think that a king, Gopala, in the Indian state of Bengal was among the first few democratically elected kings in the world (around 750 AD). One wonders how such a society reached its current state! That is not limited to political governance but present in every field of life. We need to analyse the problems more critically to find out suitable solutions.

It will be pertinent to understand how Indian society evolved. It is a largely accepted fact that general people from southern India are less corrupt. It coincides with the fact that north India had to face repeated foreign invasions, mainly from Muslim invaders who had very different social, religious, ethical and legal concepts as compared to the locals. South did not face that so often and so intensely. Those foreign invaders, first by the Middle Eastern or Central Asian Muslims and then Europeans (mainly the British) imposed a drastic change on our ways of lives. Many people, mainly men, used so many excuses to hide our own inability to protect our culture, our women, our ways of lives. Many such excuses took shape in form of religious dictates, distorted version of "tradition" and more awfully in the name of peace. Spread of “pardha” among women (which was present only among very few warrior communities like Rajputs, before Muslim invasion), imposing all sorts of rules (in the name of religion and tradition) to deter people asking questions, to curb personal freedom and our senses of justice; in short- to destroy of our own value and education system. Remember Nalanda university, one of the first and great organised universities in the world? It was destroyed by Bakhtiyar Khalji around 1200 AD, signifying the start of decline of Indian education and society.

It also changed our perception about corruption. We all witnessed that ruling class do not obey laws that are imposed on others. Different set of rules are applicable to different people, depending on caste, religion, closeness to ruling class and so on. Since then breaking laws was (and still is) equated to power and a sure sign of the socio-political elites. When a common Indian breaks a law or manage any special privilege, s/he feels proud and get satisfaction (may be temporary) to be equated as an “elite”. General Indians forgot that laws are for them, to keep them safe and disciplined. Agreeability and sycophancy, instead of critical thinking and logic, became the rule to climb both social and professional hierarchy. That practice gradually eroded the social shame factor, the best and most effective deterrent against corruption in any country, in any society. We started accepting corruption in the name of reality. Gradually we lost the sense of justice and honesty. University professors, scientists, doctors, bureaucrats, teachers, police and many others from India, in India or abroad (with or without foreign degrees) are as corrupt and dishonest as any illiterate person. It affected our ability to make or reform laws in post-1947 India. Still more than half of our current Indian laws (both civil and criminal) were introduced by our colonial British rulers to rule, not to "govern", their “native” subjects. Most of these laws are highly ineffective today. Some are even anti-national. Recent prosecution of noted social activist and reformer Dr Binayak Sen under British introduced sedation law is one such example.

Not many policy decisions in India are well planned. Not even the much hyped economic liberalization in 1991. That was a mere compulsion after mortgaging 67 tons of gold in the Bank of England due to years of misrule and closed economy. We were desperate to save our economy from total melt down. We could not reform our civil governance and judiciary to match the requirement of a free market, liberalized economy. We naively wished that everything will fall in place due to so-called open market economy and privatization. We conveniently forgot that true “open market” (even in US) is as utopian as communism. Greed of a very small section of our population increased exponentially but we could not protect majority others, the common man (“amm admi” as per popular politicking) from the greed that allowed massive, extra-constitutional manipulation of the system. Those social “elites” include not only businessmen and industrialists but also politicians, bureaucrats, corporate managers, scientists, professors, doctors and other professionals. It simply added to the already high level of corruption (due to socialistic quota-license raj regime of pre-1991 era). Magnitude of recent scams are good indicators.

We practically ruined almost all (if not all) of our democratic institutions. Universities and institutes start resembling party offices. Internal control mechanisms were effectively destroyed. That’s why none of the recent high profile scams were detected and/or prevented by the internal control mechanism of respective departments or ministries. All the scams came to light due to outside private (by people like Subramanium Swamy) or 24x7 media or Supreme Court interventions. Not a single high profile current office bearers could gather the courage or honesty or both to support the services by people like Binayak Sen or the ongoing anti-corruption movement initiated by Anna Hazare, a class 7 educated gentleman (in real sense of the word). It says a volume about our current society. Our political masters initially gave in to the demands of Anna Hazare in the wake of many state assembly elections. Once the elections were over and government started negotiating with team Anna, the real intension of our “elected representatives” started becoming clearer. They were more interested to discredit team Anna or “civil society” or anyone who raises voice against all pervasive corruption, than any meaningful discussion to draft an effective Jan Lokpal bill. Does it take much intelligence to imagine the level of cooperation and desire of our elected representatives to pass an effective Lokpal bill in a parliament where about one forth of the members (154 to be precise) and 10 cabinet ministers are having criminal cases pending against them (civil litigation that include financial crimes are not included)? It partly explains why the government drafted, much less stringent Lokpal bill failed to pass in Indian parliament in last 42 odd years.

In India, collective decision making hardly exists. That trend is also evident among many Indian professionals, managing a group of people under them, in India and abroad. Most of the meetings or negotiations are used mainly to inform (rather than discussing) others what few people, so-called higher authority (or "high command") already decided. Feudal nature of decision making, lack of taking responsibility is rampant in every section of our society, starting from the highest level of government to private companies to the lowest level of family issues. Remuneration and/or promotion is not always based on performance but one's ability to please higher authority. Many times the credit for a good job and blame/responsibility for a sloppy work goes, rather imposed, on other people (not the person who actually deserve it). We generally try to gloss over any past mistakes, avoid fixing responsibilities and forget to learn from that. We prefer to "move on" and end up doing the same mistakes, again and again. We build new universities, institutions to improve quality (of research and higher education) or crate new ministries to improve governance without analyzing and learning why our old institutions or ministries failed. That ultimately give rise to the "chalta hai" mentality, tendency of shifting responsibilities, as we often witness among Indian professionals (both in government and private enterprises), in India and abroad. We probably can not afford to care how to build a motivated group.

That attitude helps spreading the culture of mediocrity, erode our productivity and quality of work in the long run, in every field of life, starting from research to business to civil governance. "Success" in such situations depends more on one's ability to use the existing corrupt practices and loopholes (of our system) than on taking responsibility, improve productivity, adhere to professional ethics and, more importantly, desire to change the system that can enable us to do better, enable us to dream to become the best.

That systemic failure makes many able people frustrated who ultimately become aloof. Provokes many to seek justice or other avenues to address personal grievances. This is one of the major factors for not only fast spread of extremist movements like naxals but also for huge brain-drain and very low quality reverse brain-drain or "brain-gain" as some call it (going back to India). Many of our better quality manpower, established abroad, prefer not coming back and settling in India. Some do prefer contributing from abroad. That allows them to speak the truth while insulating themselves and their families from retaliation, as we often see against people like Satyendra Dubey.

Our political parties are no exception. Not a single political party has internal democracy to attract, groom and promote people with true leadership quality. All are run like dynasties, feudal kingdoms (barring the communists, so far). That’s one of the reasons for increasing tendencies of common people to take laws into their own hands. If an able person is discriminated against and can pinpoint the responsible person or authority, it is almost impossible to gag or stop him to seek "justice". Such people eventually find their ways. That may or may not be so constitutional, neither do they care.

Many feel that India probably need or will soon have an Egypt-Tunisia type revolution. They probably do not understand that Indian corruption has a democratic twist, unlike Arab countries. It is true that there is a strong selection pressure to promote people without any sense of justice, honesty and courage (to speak out and remain honest). But if you have the required qualifications, you can join the select club to enjoy the fruits of corruption and lawlessness. That extra-constitutional rights are not limited to friends and relatives of the king or social “elites”, unlike Arab countries. That safety-valve eases a lot of pressure from the cooker and prevents it from bursting early. That’s why rise of common-man politicians like Laloo, Mulayam, Mayawati did not have much positive impact on Indian society, despite of a huge initial promise, so far social equality, corruption in public lives and transparency in governance is concerned.

We also need to understand that staging a revolution is not the same or end of reforming a society. In fact, that is just the beginning of a multi-act drama. Later stages are more difficult and need much longer term, more intense preparation. We need to figure out whom do we think would fill the gap, in case of a successful revolution, as many hopes for. We do not have enough, qualified and, most importantly, honest people to replace the existing lot. That vacuum is not limited to politics but present in every field, every occupation in India. Our "test score" culture kills both natural leadership quality and scientific/technical ability. Over-emphasis on database type information, occasional fascination with knowledge do not allow us to become “wise”. We pathetically lack the ability to ask questions, solve problems and generate novel ideas- be it technical or scientific or social issues like corruption. In short, all of our professionals (be it politicians, police, scientists, professors, lawyers, doctors, engineers and so on) are coming from the same society, from the same pool of people with almost same education and grooming. We must not expect to make any sustainable change with such bunch of (mostly) mediocre and corrupt people. Our task becomes harder considering the fact that not a single country in the whole world with considerable period of foreign rule ever became a developed country, so far.

What is the way forward? Or should we keep on marching the same path and expect a divine miracle to become a “superpower”, “developed” country in future, as many Indians dream against all realistic logic?

I think the solution lies within. We cannot expect everyone to become honest but ourselves. Majority of us support corruption (in the name of "reality") when it benefits us. We start shouting only when we are at the receiving end. We fool ourselves. We must understand that we can not eat the cake and have it at the same time. Our homes are the best place to start that crusade, if I may say so. We need to teach our kids to have some sense of justice and honesty. We must allow or force them to face consequences of their actions, from very childhood. At the same time, we must not force them to accept corruption in the name of "reality" or "practical sense". That is more important than some rote memorization and test-score based “education”.

I do acknowledge that its not only very hard but also dangerous to oppose corruption in Indian situation. Many of the time the official complain goes to the same person against whom you are complaining! This is systemic. That's why the rate of prosecution by India's "premier investigation agency", CBI, is so poor (particularly against influential politicians and bureaucrats); that's why so many politicians are opposed to include Prime Minister under Jan Lokpal bill (as proposed by team Anna). We need to be little careful here while speaking out against corruption. Sometimes we may have to become “anonymous” to voice our concerns in more formal settings, in offices, in societies and so on. That is doable in this age of internet and 24x7 media activity.

Lastly, we must bring back the social shame factor, the best and most effective deterrent against corruption. It is our responsibility to make those openly or known corrupt people feel ashamed and socially outcast. If we have the desire, we surely can avoid making any matrimonial relationship with a known, unacceptably high (relatively speaking) corrupt person or children of such people. Generally a tamarind tree does not produce mangoes.

Again, we need to remember that social shame is the best deterrent to minimize corruption in any society and very effectively used in western societies. Can we do that to start our dream of a better India, while joining rallies and praising people like Anna Hazare in public forums?

Short link- http://goo.gl/Ur41P

"but, what can I do?"

2011-01-28T20:22:00.032-05:00

"But, what can I do?" I hear that exclamation (or should I say "helplessness") quite often whenever people discuss democracy, civil liberty, corruption type issues in the context of India. I also used to belong to that category just few years ago and used to wonder "but, what can I do"! We used to feel so helpless. Immenseness of the problem make it more confusing. Where to start? It is truly overwhelming.

Now I am changing the gear a bit. Today I attended a very informative "public hearing" organized by "We the people" forum of the "Ohio Center for Law Related Education" (OCLRE). It was a state level competition among high school students to make them aware of their "right and responsibilities" under American constitution. Those students need to understand different laws and more importantly its interpretation. They get few months time to prepare for that, with the help of school teacher(s). Then they appear before a panel of jury, generally formed by different people from different walks of life- teachers, administrators, lawyers, judges and law makers (senators and congressmen; i.e MP, MLA equivalent in India). It is about 20 mins hearing time for each school. The students get 10 mins time for inaugural speech. Then the juries ask questions to determine how well they have understood the issue and and not jut parroting some data or prepared statement. Most of the time there is no "right" or "wrong" answer. Whatever the students say need to be clarified with logic and examples. One example- "do you support civil disobedience in a democracy and why". Students also get chance to freely interact with elected public representatives, lawyers, judges and so on. I like the idea. I wish we had something like that in our schools to know more about our country and, most importantly, its constitutional foundation.

Now changing the gear again. I have a friend who recently went through a messy divorce. He got married to a lady from a rich family. The marriage did not click. They were not compatible to each other. It is not the fault of the man or the woman but their upbringing, core values as a human being were totally different. They spent seven days together after marriage. My friend went back to US to join his job while his wife remained in India. Despite of my friend's best efforts his newly married wife did not come to US. Finally he went back to India to attend his father for his deteriorating health. During his stay there my friend and his sister were arrested by police on charges of "demanding dowry, physical abuse and mental torture". It was very sudden development for him. Police arrested them during 10.30 at night. We need to keep in mind that his wife did not stay with her in-laws but lived with her own family for the whole time my friend was in US. My friend was a well-aware (at least he used to think so), "educated" person. He described his first feelings during arrrest was "helpless, scared to the death" in the police station. His passport was confiscated. The next day of his arrest, his father died but he could not go to see his dead father for the last time. They had no idea, whatsoever, about how the police work, how to handle them, what are his/his sister's legal rights, so on and so forth. They learned many things later; e.g legally police cannot arrest any women after 6.30 pm, both the police officer and the person need to sign (or thumb impression) the arrest warrant when police is arresting a person and many such laws, norms, legal ways to fight back against police atrocities and general corruption.

During the whole divorce battle, they learned how our laws are twisted, sold and misused by almost everyone, starting from police, lawyers, judges, media and so on. Everyone was asking for bribe from them. Even court judges were no exception. The dowry related law is very clear to mention that both parties, who give and who receive dowry should be prosecuted. But there is not a single instance that any parent who claim to have given dowry had ever been prosecuted in Indian legal history. If the marriage is successful the money or items given to the groom becomes "gift" while the same becomes "dowry" if the marriage goes bad! My friend learned that despite of giving ample evidences that police were not following laws and harassing them was not sufficient for our judiciary to protect the victims. they learned that police can arrest anyone without showing arrest warrant, police can drag any woman to the police station at night 10.30 pm (the whole drama in police station went on till 2.30 am), police can file a FIR against my friend and his family claiming him (and his family members) to beat the bride when the lady was not even in their house and my friend was in US. In short, my friend came to realize, for the first time in his life, that it is totally different to write laws in a book (called constitution) and practicing that in real life.

The only good thing my friend did was to refuse to bribe anyone. The family members of the bride asked 25 lakhs rupees for an out-of-court settlement. My friend had no clue why he need to pay anyone when he did not take any dowry, never even shouted at his wife. He continued to tell his in-laws to punish him if they can prove a single crime alleged against him. After all, "they should seek justice to protect the dignity and the rights of their own daughter, and that should be more important than 25 lakhs rupees"!

He was also worried that if he can manage that huge sum of money (which he never had) and give that to the lady's family (and police, judges etc.), he practically accepting all their false allegations. That's the main reason he refused to bribe anyone or indulge in any monetary transaction to settle it out-of-court. To cut the long story short, he ultimately won the legal battle after a long fight.

Now my friend knows India better. His sister left her PhD from New York University. Went back to India and started her own fight as a social activist. They became aware how helpless few remaining honest government and other police officials are, who tried their best to get justice for them. They merely could save my friend form more legal and other harassments; but still could not punish any of those corrupt government officials or punish the family members of the lady who brought false allegations against my friend and his family.

I told this story not to highlight the fight of my friend but to show how ineffective our education system is, to groom our future citizens. Mugging up some numeric table or laws of motion is not that important than to know the reality, to know our system, to know what options we might have if we face same situation, if we want to remain honest and deal the system to deliver justice. We accept corruption in the name of reality. We make our ways through it- bribing different people and bullying weaker ones. We naively wonder why so much black money around, why we can never minimize corruption in public lives that is ruing our country from its core. And then wonder, "but what can I do?"

Would it not be a useful idea to take our primary and high school students to local police stations, court houses and let them witness a trial? Or have a guided tour to our state and national parliament houses, meet law makers whose actions practically control our daily lives? Our future citizens need to know how police work, how government officials deal with fellow citizens, or even to those who has committed a crime or alleged to have committed a crime. They need to know how to make laws, what social and ethical issues they need to deal with as a politician or a judge or even a common citizen. I think, they need to know the constrains our police, judiciary and political system. We owe it to them to prepare themselves for the eminent and upcoming future they have to handle and take responsibility of.

I know many parents will be shocked to know that the school is planning to visit the local police station or a court house with their beloved children. We, the adults, try our best to stay clear from such places, for reasons we all know. Probably police personnel will not like that idea either to expose themselves in front of some kids, which may have their own children. But just think a little deeper. It will not only expose our future citizens to know the reality and get enough time to prepare themselves to handle it, whatever it is- good or bad. If some of them are not satisfied, they may try to come up with a solution to change it in future. Police and law makers will (eventually) find it little embarrassing to tell lies to these little kids who may confront them, if caught. Older, more "practical" people might find it hard and/or even risky to ask the same questions they should have asked to our mighty policy makers, police and civil administration.

Here in western societies people say, "if you do not like any politician, then try to become one". In India, we never groom ourselves, our kids to become a true leader, a true politician. Not a single political party in India have any democracy in electing their own leaders, about deciding any policy within the party. That is one of the reasons why we get that type of politicians and policies we have now. There is almost no chance to get our own Barak Obama, from any party in India. We rightly get what we deserve. We wrongly think that by insulating our kids from reality we are protecting them. In reality, we are making them incompetent to have a functional democracy, to take responsibility of their own lives and country and more importantly we force majority of them to stand in the already long que in front of many foreign embassies.

Forcing the kids to go to private tuition or judo or cricket or tennis or computer class probably is important. But I will ask teachers and parents to think about what they can really do, in real life, to make a positive and sustainable change in attitude as a personal attempt to make a brighter future for themselves, for their own children and the country.

This is one of the things that you can do, I can do, we all can do as individuals. Worth a try, I think.

Short URL- http://goo.gl/Wk2PTY

The Great Dilemma of the Life Sciences

2010-12-03T21:06:00.021-05:00

It is an excerpt from the chapter, "The Great Dilema of The Life Sciences", in the book, "Heraclitean Fire: Sketches from a Life Before Nature" by famous biologist, Erwin Chargaff. The book was published in 1978 by Rockefeller University Press, New York. Hope you will enjoy reading it, in the context of today's research scenario. I enjoyed reading it and feel like sharing with others.

One man or two may decide to study a certain beetle. Whether they do this because the animal is pest or biological delight is immaterial. If they find something of scientific interest, there will soon be ten others and more who will do the same. Once there are a hundred men studying the beetle, they will form a society and publish a journal. A society creates a profession, and a profession cannot be permitted to die. It is upto the nation to support it. If the nation can be persuaded, there will soon be a thousand members of the society for the study of the beetle. It is obvious at this stage the beetle can no longer become extinct, for what would all these experts do who may well outnumber the beetle? Then a foundation will arise whose lay members- influential bankers, society ladies- will neither know nor care whether their function is to help with the eradication or preservation of the beetle. They know one thing: they must support those who study the beetle. There may even be a Beetle Ball.

Professional scientists have, by necessity, limited vision. I always tried not to be professional scientist, since I dislike professional professionals. What I used to call "human beings" are becoming rarer as I look around. Not so long ago, St. Augustine would say: "the heart speaks to the heart". But now computer talks to computer. Most people I meet in my or other universities seem to be rejects of IBM. They are really the narrowest, the dullest kinds of experts or specialists; they are essentially molecular podiatrists: people who know all about the fifteenth foot of the centipede.

When you spend your life watching a bubble chamber or running cesium chloride gradient, you may become an expert bubbler or gradient runner, but there is little likelihood of your thus acquiring much wisdom. There is, in fact, a good chance that such people will turn into a very dull fellow indeed, wasting their lives by trying to outrun ten other dull fellows with whom they are in competition.

How is science done in our days? Here I must immediately make a distinction between science as a profession and science as the expression of some of the faculties of the human mind. The two are not necessarily connected. When someone tells me "I am a professional scientist," it does not automatically mean that he is a scientist. The distinction I am suggesting here has nothing to do directly with the question of talent. There have always been more or less gifted scientists, and there were even a few, very few, scientific geniuses. But what I want to bring out is that as a profession science is one of the most recent ones. It barely existed when I began my studies. Perhaps the exception is chemistry, where, when you called yourself a professional chemist, people would assume that you worked in the chemical industry. This was about the only mass outlet for academically trained scientists. It was not an accident that, when the science departments of the universities began to swell and to expand, it was always the chemistry department that led the way; just as the first modern teaching and research laboratory at a university was Liebig's chemistry laboratory in Giessen.

Otherwise, one entered a career in science, just as in history or philosophy, by trying to become a teacher at a college or even a high school. There were very few jobs, and almost none that paid enough to live on, except for the position of the professor himself. And there was usually only one professor for a discipline. Hence the old students' saying that there were only two ways to make a university career: per anum or per vaginam. You tried to become the professor's darling or you married his daughter. Obviously, this limited the choice: some professors were very nasty, some daughters were very ugly. Girl students were altogether out of luck, but there were only a few of them.

You may conclude - and you are right - that this was a most unpleasant system. But it had one advantage: it acted as a sieve, letting through the few who could not do otherwise. By requiring what amounted to a pledge to poverty, it kept out all those who, to use a nasty term, were not "highly motivated." It produced a slightly smaller number, but probably a much higher density, of good scientists than does the present system.

I should by no means wish to give the impression that I am in favor of the old system. It was abominable. Nor am I, on the other hand, in agreement with the way things are done now; for I am convinced that with our methods of organizing and supporting it we are effectively killing science. We are destroying the whole concept of science, as it had developed over the centuries.

This may sound to you awfully apocalyptic, and I ought to clarify it a little. I shall try to do this under four headings: What has science done to the universities? What have the universities done to science? What has science done to the country? What has the country done to science?

All these interactions have to do with science as a profession. But you will remember that I have made a distinction between this aspect and that of science as a product of the human mind. In this respect - namely, as the search for truth about nature - science began as a branch of philosophy, and for me this connection has never broken off. Science is an admirable product of human reasoning, as admirable and astonishing as are music or poetry or the arts. Previous generations understood this very well. For instance, I am a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and, until recently, before Columbia sent me down for recycling, I belonged to their Graduate Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

As a mental occupation, as a product of the human mind, science does not operate on a time scale. Just as nobody could have told Mozart how many operas he ought to write, there can be no five-year plan for science. It comes as it comes, it goes as it goes. Should all melting points be raised by 10 percent; are six laws of thermodynamics better than three? But when America decided to go into science in a big way - and this really took place only within the last thirty or forty years - it went into it in a crazy fashion. This country has always had the tendency to blow up every balloon until it bursts, and it has done it also with science.

What science has done to the universities is that it has inflated and disfigured them; it has left them more bankrupt than they were before. The large private universities have been turned into huge corporations whose only business is to lose money. There are exceptions, but, in general, power-hungry, empty-headed money grabbers have taken over. The true and only function of a university, namely, to help young people find themselves by bringing to them the accumulated memory of mankind, has been swept aside. By misunderstanding, through overemphasis, of the old adage of the unity of research and learning, research has been made into a teaching tool, into a most expensive and stultifying one, forcing every student to become a researcher and trivializing the purpose of scientific research. Thousands of meaningless and costly experiments are performed to persuade the young that water boils at 100 degrees (Celcius). We are now paying the price for excessive veneration of the value of inductive reasoning.

Now to my second question: What have the universities done to science? They have bled it for overhead; they have cheapened and vulgarized it to the point of nonrecognition; they have made it into a public-relations "gimmick." If the products of this kind of education often still are so good, it testifies only to the resilience of young minds. But many are damaged irreversibly.

What has science done to the country? Obviously, a lot of good and a lot of evil. If the republic envisioned by Plato had come to pass, that is, a dictatorship of wise philosophers, may be no evil would have come to the state from science. But how many wise men will you meet in your future long lives? When I look at our leading statesmen, there are brought back to me the immortal words that the Duke of Wellington once spoke of his generals. "They may not frighten the enemy, but, by God, they frighten me!" The thoughtless, almost automatic use of science as the seed of technology has landed us in a fearful mess. The cry that what we need is more and ever more science has lost all persuasion, as far as I am concerned. The republic will not be saved by geese, not even by geese with a PhD.

What has the country done to science? In a way, I have already answered the question. When you have been a scientist all your life, going to the laboratory every day and spending all your days among other scientists, it becomes hard to imagine that there still are people in this country other than scientists, although an optimistic forecast made a few years ago promised me that in less than hundred years there would be more scientists than people in the United States. In any event, as I have already mentioned, the country at large views science with great diffidence and often with dislike; and the rain of suspicion falls alike on the guilty and on the just. I don't want to go into the tedious arguments about pollution and DDT and all the rest. I shall also not discuss whether ten million blackbirds ought to have been killed, by Tergitol or otherwise; nor shall I have anything to say about Napalm, that innocent pastime of a Harvard professor.

Our kind of science has become so dependent on public support that nobody seems to be able to do any research without a handout. If their applications are turned down, even the youngest and most vigorous assistant professors stop all work and spend the rest of their miserable days writing more applications. This continual turning off and on of the financial faucets produces Pavlovian effects and a general neurasthenia that are bound to damage science irreversibly. It would have been much better if it had never got so rich before getting so poor, for in the meantime many young people have been lured into a career that may never materialize.

P.S. Not much has changed- probably gone worse ever since.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/wKfPLZ

Steady-state economy and de-growth models of development.

2010-10-24T15:27:00.030-04:00

Since last few years I was wondering how many people this world can sustain. Obviously the answer depends on how we define sustainability and what quality of life we like to have to calculate that number. Initially we used to think that this world can sustain 4 billion people. Later we revised that data to 6 billion. Now we know that world can (rather “have to”) support more than that. One report suggests that we already need 1.2 earth to sustain just our current population (1).

Now think that majority of world population (including those in rapidly developing countries like India, China, Brazil etc are nowhere near the desired living standard that people in very few affluent, first world countries enjoy. The same question is intimately related to many other questions related to 'sustainability' and 'growth', two favorite terms for many, if not majority, corporate, government and even non-profit organizations worldwide. These terms are highly misused or used very vaguely as an advertising tool.

I was also wondering what type of model of development we should have, to sustain this world and our quality of life. It becomes more important for developing countries like India where we almost constantly hear about "development" and conflicts arising from that. In one hand, we hear the conservation and global warming experts and enthusiasts like Al Gore who tell us to consume less, create less carbon footprints in our daily lives. On the other hand, we are constantly hearing many economists and policy makers that we need “growth”, that we need to spend more (i.e consume more). National governments, corporate houses, even NGOs; all are talking about this "growth". From our childhood we had an impression that low or zero “growth” is very bad! I was confused like many other general citizens, who want to behave responsibly. Then I came across an interesting article in a reputed research journal, “EMBO Reports” (Sep 2010 issue, Vol. 11, No. 9, pp. 659-663) (2). Basically the article is about consequences and desirability of a second green revolution to feed ever increasing global population (and eventually turning the world into a giant farmhouse).

The article emphasizes on alternative economic models that recognize ecological limits of human development and emphasize social equality. It described two alternative economic models. The first one proposes a steady-state economy: one that has stopped growing in terms of GDP, but continues to improve quality of life and is maintained by an ecologically sustainable rate of resource throughput and a constant human population. The second one is a sustainable de-growth model that has been defined as “an equitable down-scaling of production and consumption that increases human well-being and enhances ecological conditions at the local and global level, in the short and long term”. The paradigm is that human progress without economic growth is possible. It has been shown repeatedly that GDP per capita does not correlate with overall happiness above a certain level of satisfying people’s basic needs. According to a recent article, earning more than a threshold level does not translate into increasing overall happiness and satisfaction of life, while may have negative impact on quality of life. That cut-off value is ~ $ 75,000 per annum per family in USA (as of 2010) (3).

The defenders of de-growth emphasize that this process is “not the same as recession or depression— there should be no social or quality of life deterioration—nor does it promote a return to a fictitious pre-industrial pastoral past”.

It is almost impossible to tame greed of people (for both power and money), mainly the ambitious and intelligent ones that influence public policies and run private industries through the way current “growth” based economic model is practiced. That's one of the reasons why many, including national governments, prefer GDP type macro-economic parameters despite loud demands to adondon GDP as the overriding measure to indicate social and economical development (4). In 1972, the tiny Himalayan nation of Bhutan opted to base its policy-making on indicators of 'gross national happiness', with King Jigme Singye Wangchuck declaring that this measure was more important than more conventional indicators such as gross domestic product (GDP). Today, after three decades and the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, his remarks seem prescient. A consensus among economists and policy-makers is growing that governments' reliance on GDP as the main proxy for social well-being and progress is leading the world in wrong and unsustainable directions (5).

It raises a serious question that if I have talent and ambition, how much right (both ethical and legal) do I have to get what I want! How beneficial or harmful is the typical “winners take it all” mentality for overall development of any society? Let me re-phrase the question. If powerful countries have the economical, technological and military might, does that give it the right to mow down other countries that does not agree with it OR for expanding its economic and/or political strength at the cost of many other people around the world? And more importantly, how will that affect our own social and economic prosperity?

Anyone can extend the logic at any level- starting from within a family, or an organization, or a city, or a state or a country.

Short URL- http://goo.gl/dJP2Bp

We can do something does not mean we have to do that

2009-12-29T14:05:00.009-05:00

I was watching the sixth sense technology lecture by Pranav Mistry in TED India forum. No doubt it is a nice idea and I appreciate that. I was checking the comments, and, as expected too many people are excited.

I was dreaming a little further. Suppose I can implant a microprocessor in one’s brain (that can communicate with his own senses), attach that with a broadband network and then enable the person to communicate with the world without any more external device, at any time, day or night. He can get any data, any picture or just anything available in the web. He will be able to store huge information there in his head and never forget anything. If I am successful in doing that and give a lecture on TED forum, I think I will get huge “congratulations” for “extraordinary innovation”, making many Indians “proud” and so on. But, please think little deeper. Do we need such a (bionic) person in the first place? Will that (bionic) person be a better human being, more genius in inventing or innovating? Will it be worth doing so? Should there any of that kind of technology be invented or be allowed? Answer for any of those questions is a big no for me. It seems that it’s almost impossible to make many people understand that we can do something does not mean that we have to do that.

We have enough technology, sufficient medical and agricultural know-how to make this world a much, much better place. Judicious use of already existing technology, proper application of our current knowledge can make a great difference. In fact, when industrial revolution started in Britain a couple of centuries ago, it promised “eradication of poverty and a more just society”. We all now know that industrialization made things worse. Agrarian societies are fairer, distribution of wealth was more equal. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not suggesting going back in time to have an agrarian society.

Most of the time, when we get any new idea, we become so excited that we tend to lose sight of bigger picture. We tend to justify the means than the goal. I know that we probably can not and should not stop innovations; but, I think, it will be better not to lose sight of the bigger picture.

Short URL: http://goo.gl/4l3pqq